Howard Oath

[Rick Duncan]

Randy Barnett has asserted that, even without knowing
the content of the Howard law oath, he is certain that
the oath is irrelevant to the judicial objectivity of
a justice who has taken the oath. Indeed, he has asked
the list to maintain a posture of silence on this
topic (even though we have beaten to death every other
substantial and *trivial* issue involving Florida over
the course of the last month).

Fine. Let's all agree that *no oath* that any judge
might take is relevant to his or her judicial fitness.
Therefore, there is no reason to learn the facts about
this oath, because no matter its content it is
irrelevant.

By the way, I went to the Howard Law web page to see
if the oath is printed there, but I couldn't find it.
However, the very first message on the Howard Law home
page was this quote from Charles Hamilton Houston:

"A lawyer's either a social engineer or a parasite on
society."

Hmmm. I wonder what that makes a judge who rejects
being a social engineer and instead chooses to follow
the law?  --Rick Duncan


--- Randy Barnett <rbarnett at BU.EDU> wrote:
> I agree entirely with Eugene and others who have
> expressed their view that
> an oath of the sort that has been mentioned has no
> bearing on a person's
> fitness for judicial office, etc.  I also think that
> raising this issue in
> the midst of the heated controversy in which we are
> currently embroiled is
> unfortunate.  I hope that it will not be necessary
> for every member of the
> list to post the same sentiment.
>
> In the interest of avoiding a deluge to the list,
> perhaps only those who
> think such an oath IS relevant to judicial fitness
> can post their view and,
> hearing no second, we can take the remaining silence
> of the list as either
> general disagreement with that proposition or the
> absence of any strong
> endorsement of this suggestion.  (Of course, if
> there ARE further proponents
> of the view that such an oath is relevant, opposing
> responses would be
> entirely appropriate.)
>
> I hesitated to offer this suggestion for fear it may
> be presumptuous and, if
> it is, I apologize.
>
> Randy
>
> __________________________________________
> Randy E. Barnett
> Austin B. Fletcher Professor
> Boston University School of Law
> 765 Commonwealth Ave.
> Boston, MA  02215
> mailto:rbarnett at bu.edu
> (617) 353-3099 (phone)
> (617) 353-3077 (fax)
> http://www.bu.edu/rbarnett
> http://www.bu.edu/rbarnett/SOL.htm (Structure of
> Liberty page)
> http://www.LysanderSpooner.org (Lysander Spooner
> Website)
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Discussion list for con law professors
> > [mailto:CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu]On Behalf Of
> Garrett Epps
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 2:38 PM
> > To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> > Subject: Re: Howard Oath
> >
> >
> > > I don't know exactly what kind of oath Howard
> > > graduates take (not only the precise words, but
> also
> > > the meaning the oath is understood as having in
> the
> > > Howard community). But certainly it is something
> worth
> > > knowing, something the media ought to
> investigate. No?
> >
> > No.  I can't decide if this query is just silly or
> truly ominous.
> >  But I can imagine the outrage of the poster if
> someone were to
> > begin suggesting that a judge was unfit to hear a
> case because of
> > sworn membership in a religious society, or a
> fraternal lodge.
> >
> > --
> > Garrett Epps
> > Associate Professor
> > University of Oregon Law School
> > 1221 University of Oregon
> > Eugene OR 97403
> >


=====
Rick Duncan (conlawprof at yahoo.com)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/