If you don't believe judges should be originalist/textualist, it's hard to justify them being life-tenured & unelected.
.@baseballcrank @jadler1969 the incorrect premise of your question is that originalism and textualism are meaningfully constraining
-
-
@rickhasen@jadler1969 My point is, if you believe judges are never constrained by law, why shouldn't they instead be responsive to voters? -
.
@baseballcrank@jadler1969 agreed, but don't think that textualists or originalists are any more constrained than other judges -
@rickhasen@jadler1969 I think your agreement with abolishing life tenure & unelected judges is not widespread among anti-textualists. -
@baseballcrank@jadler1969 I don't support life tenure (I want term limits) but I'm more ambivalent on judicial elections.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@rickhasen@baseballcrank constraining compared to what? In most statutory cases, textualism works just fine. -
@jadler1969@baseballcrank compared to other methods of interpretation. -
@rickhasen@baseballcrank we'll agree to disagree on that point. -
@jadler1969@baseballcrank I love it when we get to this point in a Twitter argument. Maybe we should start there next time! -
@rickhasen@jadler1969@baseballcrank: it's more about the journey than destination—at least for the neutrals :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.