Supreme Bloggery
Some of the nation’s finest legal minds are butting heads on LiveCurrent’s Supreme Court blog, and readers are welcome to join them. An edited sampling:
“It’s far better that the Senate discover a nominee’s views on key issues than engage in such frolics as trying to figure out a nominee’s video-renting habits,” says author Edward Lazarus.
“Asking for specific views on cases likely to come before the court is ethically improper,” counters Douglas W. Kmiec.
Erwin Chemerinsky cautions that “knowledge is always better than ignorance. If a person has views, keeping them secret does not make the person more impartial.”
To which Eugene Volokh fires back: “Imagine that a justice testifies under oath about his views on, say, abortion and later reaches a contrary decision. Partisans on the relevant side will likely cry “perjury!”
Join the free-for-all at latimes.com/livecurrent.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
