Law professors and political scientists: Observations on the law/politics distinction in the guinier/rosenberg debate

Boston University Law Review

Volumn 89, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 581-587

  Post, Robert ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67649531418     PISSN: 00068047     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (38)

1. 1 Lani Guinier, The Supreme Court, 2007 Term - Foreword: Demosprudence Through Dissent, 122 HARV. L. REV. 4, 15-16 (2008).
2. 2 Id. at 50.
3. 3 Id. at 47.
4. 4 JEREMY WALDRON, THE DIGNITY of LEGISLATION 156 (1999) (suggesting that many "legislative achievements claim[] authority and respect as law in the circumstances of politics, including the circumstance of disagreement");
5. JEREMY WALDRON, LAW and DISAGREEMENT 159 (1999) [hereinafter WALDRON, LAW AND D ISAGREEMENT] ("What is normally understood by politics is that it is an arena in which the members of some group debate and find ways of reaching decisions on various issues in spite of the fact that they disagree about the values and principles that the merits of those issues engage.").
6. 5 See WALDRON, LAW AND DISAGREEMENT, supra note 4, at 15.
7. 6 Guinier, supra note 1, at 121.
8. 7 Id. at 125.
9. 8 Gerald N. Rosenberg, Romancing the Court, 89 B. U. L. REV. 563, 575 (2009).
10. 9 Id. at 578.
11. 10 Id. at 578-79.
12. 11 Id. at 575.
13. 12 Id. at 564.
14. 13 Id.
15. 14 Id.
16. 15 Id.
17. 16 Id. at 567-73.
18. 17 Id. at 565-67.
19. 18 Id. at 565-66 (quoting Nathaniel Persily, Introduction to NATHANIEL PERSILY, JACK CITRIN and PATRICK J. EGAN, PUBLIC OPINION AND CONSTITUTIONAL CONTROVERSY 8 (2008)).
20. 19 Id. at 569.
21. 20 Id. at 565-67.
22. 21 Id. at 578.
23. 22 See WALDRON, LAW AND DISAGREEMENT, supra note 4, at 15.
24. 23 Guinier, supra note 1, at 119.
25. 24 Rosenberg, supra note 8, at 569.
26. 25 Id. at 573 (quoting Guinier, supra note 1, at 32, 39, 42, 58, 90, 114, 118).
27. 26 Id.
28. 27 Guinier, supra note 1, at 58-59 (suggesting that dissenting opinions "authorize ordinary people to see themselves as members of a constitutional community with power to reinterpret or remake the law").
29. 28 See, e.g., Robert Post and Reva Siegel, Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and Backlash, 42 HARV. C. R.-C. L. L. REV. 373, 374 (2007)
30. Robert POST, The Supreme Court, 2002 Term - Foreword: Fashioning the Legal Constitution: Culture, Courts, and Law, 117 HARV. L. REV. 4, 10 (2003)
31. Reva Siegel, Dead or Alive: Originalism as Popular Constitutionalism in Heller, 122 HARV. L. REV. 191, 240 (2008).
32. 29 Rosenberg, supra note 8, at 573-74.
33. 30 Id. at 564.
34. 31 Guinier, supra note 1, at 12.
35. 32 Id. at 14.
36. 33 Id. at 132.
37. 34 Id. at 55.
38. 35 Id. at 111.