« Metacognition and Learning How to Learn Online – Preparing for Fall Teaching in Physically Distanced, Hybrid, or Remote Courses | Main | Unpacking Deadlines and the Planning Fallacy »

Monday, August 03, 2020

Competing views on the Biskupic articles

Josh Blackman sees this as a threat to the institution that the Chief must repair (through some actions that I am not sure the Chief, as "first among equals," can do) or resign. Dan Epps argues that more transparency is a good thing. Take your pick or land somewhere in the middle.

I will share and concur in a comment from the Conaw List Serv that the Biskupic stories were interesting, but not earth-shattering--some of it could have been gleaned from the opinions themselves or from what we already knew about the Court's operations.

Posted by Howard Wasserman on August 3, 2020 at 12:40 PM in Howard Wasserman, Judicial Process, Law and Politics | Permalink

Comments

One of these pieces feels like what would happen if a sports radio host moonlighted as a legal commentator. I don't know what's in the other one because it's paywalled.

For a take that I know to be reasonable, see:

https://reason.com/2020/08/03/supreme-court-leaks-are-unfortunate-but-this-wasnt-a-big-deal/

Posted by: Asher Steinberg | Aug 3, 2020 10:50:02 PM

Post a comment