New Jersey election law?

[Nelson Lund]

Mark Tushnet wrote:
>
> Nelson Lund wrote:  "It's equally true that a majority of the Supreme Court
> declined to reject this argument."  Sure, but the list of arguments that a
> majority of the Supreme Court has declined to reject is essentially infinite
> (for example, a majority of the Supreme Court has declined to reject every
> argument presented in every unsuccessful petition for certiorari -- not to
> mention my favorite legal argument, that the views of Mark Tushnet on every
> constitutional question are the law of the land under Article VI, an argument
> that a majority of the Supreme Court has also declined to reject).

Of course! But the fact that a larger minority of the Court rejected the
argument than endorsed it is also legally irrelevant.

Nelson Lund