So a fair and frequent question I get from my friends when I describe my optimistic view about the conservative Supreme Court justices is: “How can you be so naive?”

It’s a fair question, as this faith has led me to many errors. I had faith in Bush v. Gore. And in Eldred v. Reno. And in the Obamacare case (the result was consistent if not the reasoning). And in Golan v. Holder.

In each case, I was wrong. Some say because I read the “originalism” wrongly. Some say because I have too much faith in the “originalists.”

But regardless, here I go again: As I have written, in my view, a committed originalist would find it difficult to interpret the term “corruption” to refer to “quid pro quo” corruption alone. 

So we’ll see. 

  1. wanitapintar reblogged this from lessig and added:
    Seorang teman baru aja ngatain gue dengan “doing the same thing and expect different thing is insanity” dan tiba-tiba...
  2. iloveyoucassandra reblogged this from lessig and added:
    OMG YES.
  3. myaqibdaud reblogged this from lessig
  4. vastier reblogged this from lessig
  5. raphi-anoesies reblogged this from lessig
  6. vanezuldu reblogged this from lessig and added:
    Dont forget to read
  7. mandymangina reblogged this from lessig
  8. lessig posted this

Blog comments powered by Disqus

 



Posts I Liked on Tumblr