The lie of "strict construction"
Time to geek out - Jurisprudence Style. Neil Siegel (of Duke Law) and Aziz Huq (of the Brennan Center at NYU) wrote an excellent article about the false pose of "strict constructionism" that Justice Scalia and his admirers (including President Bush) hide behind as they advance their agenda.
posted by Ben at
11:09 AM
4 Comments:
I would like to note that Professor Siegel's constitutional law final exam had a question precisely on this topic, so he might have "borrowed" some of his material from 1Ls :). Great article, though -- I hope Scalia has the opportunity to read it.
erin g
By
Anonymous, at 6/22/2005 5:15 PM
When you go to the costume party, they won't let you in without a mask.
And please note that Professor Siegel is probably masquerading (the 'objective observer who celebrates a moderate conservative federalist Reagan appointee') in this article.
Prohibiting the execution of minors is good. Kennedy's evolving standards of decency is less clearly so. As Siegel describes it, as rooted in national consensus, it could be used to justify gross immorality and evil.
Another way that the "evolving standard of deceny" jurisprudence could be anchored is in intuitive morality. Siegel suggests this, and I prefer a radically independent judiciary to one who is conferring with pollsters and social scientists on 'what Americans nowadays believe.'
By
Anonymous, at 6/22/2005 6:06 PM
KKC, who are you?
By
Ben, at 6/22/2005 6:32 PM
I think this was the subject of, like, my sixth post or something. Scalia's strict constructionism is B.S., though, and I'm glad someone else out there thinks so too.
By
Jeff, at 6/22/2005 7:50 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home