i think it is more a comment on the relative lack of weight of a jdversus a

[DavidEBernstein at aol.com]

I just want to reiterate for the fourth time or whatever that I never  
asserted, do not assert, and think it would be highly foolish to assert that  Anita 
Hill's appointment to Brandeis was arranged as a quid pro quo for her  
testimony.  And I frankly don't see how anyone who has read my posts on  this could 
conclude that I did say that.
 
In a message dated 12/7/2007 3:29:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,  
jca at stanford.edu writes:

any  sensible person could have believed there could be, 
any way in which an  appointment to the faculty of an elite university 
could be arranged as a  quid pro quo for testimony that (David 
Bernstein's post  asserts)


 
 
David E.  Bernstein
Professor
George Mason University School of  Law
http://mason.gmu.edu/~dbernste



**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest 
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20071207/8f9595f0/attachment.htm