Legal Commentary

Georgetown Law Journal Celebrates Justice Stevens

By David Bernstein

The Georgetown Law Journal and the Supreme Court Institute have an impressive lineup of speakers this morning for a conference on retired Justice John Paul Stevens. It makes me a bit uncomfortable, however, that (a) the conference is styled ?The Finest Legal Mind?: A Symposium in Celebration of Justice John Paul Stevens; (b) the conference is stacked with former Stevens clerks, and former clerks rarely criticize their Justices in public; and (c) also consistent with the celebration theme, I don?t see any speaker listed who is likely be critical of the ideological thrust of Justice Stevens?s jurisprudence.

I don?t have any objection to anyone who wants to celebrate Justice Stevens?s years on the Court, including his former clerks, nor do I object when a law review publishes a single laudatory, uncritical essay on a retiring dean, faculty member or judge. However, call me a curmudgeon, but it seems like a bit of a dereliction of academic duty for a law review to hold an entire half-day celebratory conference devoted to one of the most powerful lawyers of the last fifty yeas, devoid of critical perspectives.

UPDATE: Most commenters so far think I?m being curmudgeonly, but then there?s this: 

I understand what David is saying. For example, most festschrift volumes with which I?m familiar in my own field in the humanities do not have, as their goal, the celebration of a given professor?s work in specific fashion. It?s more along the lines of ?We love ya?, so we?re taking a series of articles having nothing to do with you (other than the fact that you might be interested in reading them) and dedicating them to the wonderfulness that is you.? This conference, however, sounds to me more like it is intended to directly assess various aspects of Justice Stevens career, and the value of his output.

.... my point is that I think academic journals should err on the side of caution. There are other forums (I know, I know; just see OED) where panegyrics would be completely appropriate, but it may (and I emphasize ?may?) not be appropriate in an academic journal (or at a conference hosted by one)

Oh, and compare and contrast Ohio State?s recent conference on Justice Ginsburg?s fifteen years of Supreme Court jurisprudence. Even though the Justice was in attendance, it was a serious symposium on her jurisprudence, including at least one critical paper (by my colleague Neomi Rao), not a ?celebration.?

Full post as published by The Volokh Conspiracy on October 08, 2010 (boomark / email).