Why are so many so upset with the Miers nomination?
nlund at gmu.edu
Fri Oct 14 13:04:30 PDT 2005
If the standing issue is what makes the Court's decision indefensible,
then I suppose all nine Justices indefensibly overlooked it. But before
we settle on that conclusion, can you explain why Professor Tribe's
arguments with respect to third-party standing are indefensible? See
eroG v. hsuB and its Disguises: Freeing Bush v. Gore from its Hall of
Mirrors, 115 Harv. L. Rev. 170, 229-31 (2001). I understand that not
everyone agrees with Professor Tribe, but I had not previously seen his
arguments on this issue treated as though they are indefensible.
Michael Zimmer wrote:
>If someone with standing had brought the case, perhaps. I generally support
>the expansion of voting rights and so I would support the decision if it
>provides more than the one ticket for that particular ride. As greater
>focus has been given to voting irregularities, it will be interesting if
>Bush v. Gore comes to be an important development in equal protection vis a
>vis voting rights.
>Michael J. Zimmer
>Professor of Law
>Seton Hall Law School
>One Newark Center
>Newark, NJ 07102
> Nelson Lund
> <nlund at gmu.edu>
> Sent by: To
> conlawprof-bounce unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header
> s at lists.ucla.edu on input)
> CONLAWPROF at lists.ucla.edu
> 10/14/05 11:55 AM Subject
> Re: Why are so many so upset with
> the Miers nomination?
>Michael Zimmer wrote:
> . . . Bush v. Gore is perhaps most defensible, if at all, by the
> argument that only the Supreme Court had the respect and integrity to
> decide such a fundamental question of who is to be the President. . .
>What makes the Court's legal argument in Bush v. Gore indefensible?
>To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
>private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
>posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
>wrongly) forward the messages to others.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Conlawprof