Dershowitz on Rehnquist

[JMHACLJ at aol.com]

In a message dated 9/11/2005 6:35:01 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
RJLipkin at aol.com writes:

Are the  rules of evidence the appropriate form of "proof" on a list of 
constitutional  law scholars?  Should we dismiss evidence of the framers' intention 
as  hearsay? Or perhaps apply Rule 11 to Jeffersonian objections to the Alien 
and  Sedition Acts?


I am perplexed.  Was Dershowitz making conlaw arguments?  I read  the column 
here and I recall fact allegations about supposed anti-Semitism, not  a 
discussion of opinions evincing anti-Semitism.  Given that Dershowitz was  
establishing a fact basis (or, more properly, failing to establish one) it seems  that 
the rules regarding facts are more apropos than the principles regarding  
opinions.
 
Jim Henderson
Senior Counsel
ACLJ  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20050911/b0a0b849/attachment.htm