rtepker at ou.edu
Mon Oct 10 08:18:10 PDT 2005
I don't think your comments caused "such a turn." No need to be sorry.
Yes, theory influences actual cases. I think the problem is whether the
questions reflect some sort of "gotcha" - "I know more than you . . ."
tone, or whether (and how) senators can inquire about the "basics."
Calvert Chair of Law and Liberty
& Professor of Law
University of Oklahoma
From: RJLipkin at aol.com [mailto:RJLipkin at aol.com]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:13 AM
To: Tepker, Rick; SLevinson at law.utexas.edu; tushnet at law.georgetown.edu
Cc: CONLAWPROF at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Questioning Miers
I do not see how my original post turned into a discussion about
whether nominees should be queried on works of academic scholarship.
Although, I do believe such works are relevant to judging, my original
statement made no mention of any texts independent of caselaw. For any
subsequent statements I made to suggest such a turn I am deeply sorry.
Can we agree that constitutional theory and history exist in
actual cases? If so, let's imagine no one ever wrote a book or article
on either. Is it then appropriate to question Ms. Miers on
constitutional theory and the development of constitutional law as these
topics exist in actual cases?
Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Conlawprof