We’ve got to rescue the law from law professors. I’m tired of this idea that laypeople aren’t qualified to interpret the unambiguous meaning of plain English and need to hear out arguments from legal Kabbalists that words *don’t* mean what they mean.
Reposted from
Daniel Schwarcz
To those skeptical of or upset by Ilan's claim that an "entire literature" supports the birthright citizenship order, the best response is to substantively engage w/ the claim & assume llan's good faith..While some have done this, I’m dismayed by the many ad hominem attacks on a respected colleague.
Comments
Some things don't require debate - many issues of race, climate change, vaccination etc. Certain arguments are automatically bad faith and deserve no oxygen.
And we've seen a great deal of that here in recent days from
*those people*: *create controversy*
*also those people*: teach the controversy!
a lot of it launders bs into media of various kinds
see also cheney, dick
if you invited me in good faith to a debate on repealing the 13th amendment, I will stop listening to your ideas.