I agree he should not have said he was bound by the Circuit. But, and here is where we disagree, I guess, I don't see the issue as a tabula rasa -- the 9th Circuit has spoken directly on this exact issue and I would respect that and not easily decide it as if it were a completely new issue. To do otherwise calls to mind the New Yorker cartoon with a judge handing a decision over the bench to a litigant's lawyer while the judge says "Of course, that's just an opinion." Steve On Sep 14, 2005, at 5:58 PM, Volokh, Eugene wrote:
-- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 2900 Van Ness Street NW Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/ "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction." Albert Einstein |
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.