![[Signifying Nothing]](/local/memlogo-1.png "Welcome to Signifying Nothing")
Sebastian Holdsclaw has extracted a rather interesting comment from a long thread at Left2Right about judicial interpretation of the Constitution. However, I don’t know if it will get me to abandon my long-held opinion (only reinforced by attempting to teach two entire constitutional law textbooks) that every judicial mode of reasoning is just an excuse for attitudinalism run rampant.
Like what you’re reading?
To view other posts at Signifying Nothing, please visit the BlogFront.
Signifying Nothing formerly featured the stylings of Brock Sides, a left-leaning philosopher turned network administrator currently residing in Memphis, Tennessee who now blogs at Battlepanda, and Robert Prather, a libertarian-leaning conservative economist and occasional contributor at OTB.
Copyright © 2002–14 Chris Lawrence, Brock Sides, and Robert Prather.
The contents of this weblog are licensed under a
Creative Commons License.
![[The GIMP]](/buttons/gimp.png "The GIMP"){kind=small}
![[Steal These Buttons!]](/buttons/steal.png "Steal These Buttons!"){kind=small}
![[Permalink]](/images/permalink.png "Permanent link to this entry"){kind=small}
Recent posts
1 comment:
Thanks for linking to this – though I’m not a lawyer (I have a lowly paralegal degree which I barely used) Constitutional law has long been an interest of mine.
And though I lack the background to fully understand all the ins and outs, the post was very thought-provoking and addresses several issues I’ve often wondered about vice judicial activism and the Constitution.