I don't know enough about Amy Coney Barrett to have an opinion on her for the USSC, but the difference between the twitter impression and the Wikipedia impression is remarkable
Show this thread
-
This is the discussion that should be happeninghttps://twitter.com/J0hndom/status/1307711086272172032 …
Show this thread
For my part, I have a pretty middling and not very exciting layperson's position on stare decisis. I'm not at all thrilled with strict constitutional originalism, but am way less comfortable with fresh precedent-setting at the level of the USSC than a lot of people seem to be
-
-
Strict Constitutional Originalism is really just a way of saying 'The other two branches need to be doing their part of things instead of shoving this off on us' in so many cases though :/
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The problem with that take is that the originalist project seeks, on many issues, to upend settled precedent or understanding in favor of reaching their (contested) view of a 1789 consensus. DC v. Heller is a good example.
Thanks. 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.