I don't believe a "sizeable majority" of "legal conservatives" are engaged in "bad faith argument." But neither does a sizeable majority of legal conservatives believe the President is "sovereign." The shorthand makes it hard to know precisely whom he's referring to. - ThreadSky

jamalgreene.bsky.social • 3 days ago

I don't believe a "sizeable majority" of "legal conservatives" are engaged in "bad faith argument." But neither does a sizeable majority of legal conservatives believe the President is "sovereign." The shorthand makes it hard to know precisely whom he's referring to.

Comments

espinsegall.bsky.social•3 days ago

Jamal your article Selling Originalism (linked below) is a must read for folks interested in how originalism became a symbol and an identity card much more than a serious theory of constitutional interpretation. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/674/

noahdahl.bsky.social•1 day ago

We are likely thinking of two different sets of individuals, with some overlap.

For a recent example of what I mean though, in discussing Emil Bove's legal abbatoir, Sarah Isgur, a fairly prominent legal conservative, states when talking with David French about the charges against Eric Adams:

noahdahl.bsky.social•1 day ago

"...a prosecution that we said was going to be somewhat complicated—that line between bribery and just good old-fashioned non-criminal corruption."

If you're making arguments like that to condone Bove's actions in any way, I would argue you've veered well into bad faith territory.

jamalgreene.bsky.social•1 day ago

Sarah Isgur is not part of the legal academy AFAIK.

jamalgreene.bsky.social•1 day ago

I can’t speak to the full body of people in the world who call themselves “legal conservatives,” but I do know the legal academy, and I don’t agree that a “sizeable majority” of conservative legal academics are bad faith actors.

noahdahl.bsky.social•1 day ago

Hence my comment on different views of legal conservatives. Outside of academia, it looks different than inside, and the most prominent voices are not generally academics (although there are still many, like Barnett, Vermeule, that I think argue in bad faith).

noahdahl.bsky.social•1 day ago

FedSoc crosses that boundary and is a source of much of it however. And there are others in the constellation of activist orgs who play an outsize role in driving an agenda ostensibly steeped in legal conservatism.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply