Judge Posner should just stop talking about his terrible mistake in Crawford. The more he says, the worse he sounds: http://electionlawblog.org/?p=62722
-
-
Fair enough.But there was little or no evidence of voter disenfranchisement either. I'm on your side but 2006 was a while ago. RT
@rickhasen -
.
@espinsegall Posner says he saw no evidence law intended to disenfranchise. But lack of evidence law served antifraud purpose shows motive -
Posner is displaying the human side of judging in all its vulnerability. I think that humility is awesome. RT
@rickhasen -
.
@espinsegall But Posner's actual judging is the opposite of humility. It is cavalier and not particularly thoughtful. -
Well that is quite a claim about his career. In any event, I am not judging his judging but his decision to talk about the case.
@rickhasen -
.
@espinsegall he's cavalier in that too. -
Gotta go but on that I heartily disagree. His books on judging are amazing examples of judicial self-reflection. RT
@rickhasen -
.
@espinsegall There are ways to talk about judging which show introspection and respect.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
.
@ThisIsJoshSmith read#TheVotingWars and see my posts. Start here: http://electionlawblog.org/?p=61023 and http://electionlawblog.org/?p=61085Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Anyway, again, even if Posner is rewriting history as you argue, it is still a good thing for him to publicly ponder. RT
@rickhasenThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.