ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> TalkLeft

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: TalkLeft

Rosen Recants; Turley Takes Up His Standard

By Big Tent Democrat

ADVERTISEMENTS

After embarrassing himself, Jeff Rosen attempts rehabilitation:

Conservatives are already citing my initial piece on Sotomayor as a basis for opposing her. This willfully misreads both my piece and the follow-up response.

Sure Jeff, sure. Not to worry. Here comes Jonathan Turley:

My main concern is the lack of intellectual depth in her past opinions. I have now read dozens of her opinions and focused on the most significant rulings. They do not support the view that she is a natural pick for the Court. She is without question a historic pick — like Thurgood Marshall.

A twofer! Slamming Sotomayor AND Marshall. Good work Turley. On a serious note, Turley's analysis is laughable. He writes:

While people have demanded that I show evidence that she has not been particularly impressive in her decision, it is rather difficult to point to the absence of something. Her opinions tend to lack of broader historical or theoretical view. It is easier to point to opinions that show a broader vision of the law. For example, while I disagreed with the decision, her colleague Guido Calabresi showed such gravitas in his ruling in Boy Scouts v. Wyman.

Sotomayor’s decisions and dissents tend to be abbreviated and limited in scope. Once again, that could reflect a certain deference to her appellate status or a lack of broader vision.

I guess Turley is not a fan of judicial minimalism. I do have a question - where were those opinions with "intellectual heft" from Roberts and Alito? Hell, from Souter, Breyer and Ginsburg for that matter. I know Scalia had nothing impressive. And still doesn't imo. But not in Turley's view:

One of the complaints in my Supreme Court class is how often opinions lack a depth of history or theory — creating a unifying body of work in areas of the free speech or privacy. Instead, we often have a series of unconnected and unsatisfying insular decisions. I do not agree with Scalia on many things, but he has been able to maintain a coherent philosophy.

Not on the appellate court he didn't. Turley is inventing a new standard never before seen. Just a coincidence because it is a Latina nominee? You make the call.

Speaking for me only


Full post as published by TalkLeft on May 26, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0031 secs (from cache 11/07/26 11:38:33)