« Interview with new Harvard Law Review President | Main | Supreme Court Roundup from Aaron Streett »

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Misprint? Mistake? Or Accurate Statement?

Erwin Chemerinsky has an article in the most recently published issue of the Capital University Law Review titled "The Future of Constitutional Law."  Sorry, there's no link I could find, but it's available online, and the cite is 34 Cap. U. L. Rev. 647 (2006).  It'san account of how constitutional law may change as a result of recent changes in personnel on the Supreme Court.  It's mostly descriptive, and although I might choose to quarrel with some of his observations, I leave that to one side.  But, a propos of the question in the title to this post, I do offer this line, which is offered by way of explaining why some changes in Court personnel may be less important than others depending on who's doing the replacement and who's being replaced:

Obviously, a Democratic President replacing Justice Stevens or Justice Ginsburg, or a Republican President replacing Justice Scalia or Justice Kennedy, will not likely change the Court's ideological composition.

So, is there a misprint or mistake in there somewhere?  Or do you think Chemerinsky is right?   

Posted by Paul Horwitz on March 6, 2007 at 05:24 PM in Constitutional thoughts | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef00d834ea0cc453ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Misprint? Mistake? Or Accurate Statement?:

Comments

I couldn't find the article online either, so I'm confined to the text Paul quoted, but I think one has to be pretty wilfully obtuse to think that (a) Justice Kennedy is an undifferentiated member in good standing of the court's conservative bloc (to the extent such a bloc exists) or that (b) his replacement won't significantly alter the court's ideological composition.

Posted by: Simon | Mar 6, 2007 8:11:25 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.