Well, certainly recent Presidents have made some appointments of women in large part because they were women. I don't think anybody is denying the appropriateness of doing so. Is religion different in this respect? I wonder. If it is to any degree, is it because we're less concerned about under-representation of Protestants than we are about under-representation of women? Is it because we think that religion is less likely than gender to shape attitudes on matters of significance for a Supreme Court justice?
Rich On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Marty Lederman <lederman.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sandy's very provocative post is here: > > http://balkin.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-elephant-in-room.html > > As to which I would ask Sandy this: > > As I read your post, the "elephant in the middle of the room" is that > there is an elephant in the middle of the room, and that the elephant makes > decisions on how to act, in part, based upon its history and perspective as > an elephant. > > OK, but what follows from that? Surely not that Presidents should appoint > fewer elephants. If it's that Presidents should be indifferent as to > nominees' religion, I wholly concur. (Indeed, Article VI virtually > requires such indifference.) But that's not much of an issue these days, > is it? Bush 43 did not appoint Roberts and Alito, for instance, *because > *they were Catholic. He appointed them because he approved of their > foreseeable legal views -- views that were in part shaped by their > Catholicism, to be sure, but surely Bush was indifferent to the question of > what the various sources of their jurisprudence might be. > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Levinson, Sanford V < > slevin...@law.utexas.edu> wrote: > >> For what it is worth, I have an extended posting on this on >> Balkinization, balkin.blogspot.com >> >> I strongly disagree with Larry Tribe on this issue. >> >> Sandy >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jul 11, 2014, at 1:10 PM, "Patrick Wiseman" <pwise...@gsu.edu> wrote: >> >> It's my guess that it is exactly that kind of reductionism to which >> Prof. Tribe was originally objecting. >> >> Cheers >> Patrick >> What might follow is a serious discussion of whether, given life >> tenure and no appellate review of their decisions, ever, the relationship >> between values and law at SCOTUS is and always has been so egregiously out >> of whack that we should recognize as Posner says the Court is a unique >> "political court," or as I have written, it is not really a court at all. >> >> Best, >> >> Eric >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jul 11, 2014, at 1:31 PM, "Marty Lederman" <lederman.ma...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> If I might be so presumptuous as to shift the question somewhat: >> >> *Of course* Justices' religion, and their experiences and learnings as >> adherents of particular religions, affects their perspectives when they >> decide cases, especially (but not limited to) cases involving religion >> (e.g., Town of Greece; Hobby Lobby). If a religion had no such effect on >> its adherents, it would hardly be worthy of the name, right? >> >> So I don't think discussions of this question are or should be "off >> limits," yet I wonder . . . to what end? If we were all to agree that the >> Catholic and Jewish Justices on the Court have very different perspectives >> on these questions, in part (but not entirely) owing to their experiences >> and understandings as Catholics and Jews, what, exactly, follows from that? >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, John Bickers <bicker...@nku.edu> wrote: >> >>> When a Justice notes in oral argument (Salazar v. Buono) that the >>> Cross is not limited to Christianity but is simply the default memorial >>> because it is "the most common symbol" of the dead, how can it not be the >>> case that the justices' life experiences--jobs, schools, politics, >>> faith--are playing a role in how they decide cases? >>> >>> John Bickers >>> Salmon P. Chase College of Law >>> Northern Kentucky University >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [ >>> conlawprof-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Myron Moskovitz [ >>> mmoskov...@ggu.edu] >>> *Sent:* Friday, July 11, 2014 1:04 PM >>> *To:* CONLAWPROF >>> *Subject:* Is Discussion of Justices' Religion "Off Limits"? >>> >>> .... >>> >>> >>> >>> I replied that a judge's life experiences form at least part of his or >>> her approach to resolving cases, and it is naïve to ignore this. Some >>> Justices expressly pepper their opinions and speeches and books with this >>> fact. Thomas does, Sotomayer does, and so do many others. A Justice >>> of a minority religion (whether Judaism, Muslim, Hinduism, or any other) >>> might have had life experiences that make him or her more likely to >>> identify with citizens faced with government-sponsored explicitly-Christian >>> prayers. >>> >>> >>> >>> Tribe apparently believes that such a discussion is "off limits." I >>> don't. Who is right? >>> >>> >>> Myron >>> >>> >>> Myron Moskovitz >>> >>> *Professor of Law Emeritus* >>> >>> *Golden Gate University School of Law* >>> >>> Phone: (510) 384-0354; *e-mail*: myronmoskov...@gmail.com >>> *website*: myronmoskovitz.com <http://www.myronmoskovitz.com/> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> To post, send message to conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see >>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof >>> >>> 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. >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To post, send message to conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see >> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof >> >> 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. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To post, send message to conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see >> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof >> >> 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. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To post, send message to conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see >> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof >> >> 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. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To post, send message to conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see >> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof >> >> 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. >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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. >
_______________________________________________ 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.
