This post by Joeseph Heath is wonderfully written and a concise overview of Rawls's main contributions to liberal thought (h/t @cbarzun.bsky.social). A few quibbles: (a) the persistence of his ideas is not unexpected ... /1
My review of Scott Hershovitz's recent book, Law is a Moral Practice. Published in the University of Toronto Law Journal:
utppublishing.com/stoken/autho...
Mike Klarman v. Jonathan Turley on whether we're in a constitutional criss. Very interesting, if a bit embarrassing for Turley, IMHO. I would have liked to him to try to answer MK's question about whether there are any past comparables to the Trump actions MK listed. He didn't.
vimeo.com/1115185437
A century in the making - this week's University of Virginia conference on John Dewey's "Experience and Nature" (1925). A majestic, frustrating, (endless) book.
Event organized by @cbarzun.bsky.social www.law.virginia.edu/event/sympos... 1/
Prof. @cbarzun.bsky.social ’05, who taught Rule of Law and Its Threats with Prof. Josh Bowers, discusses why the rule of law is so important to democracy and why it is not easily defined.
Part of my continuing effort to show that the late Justice Souter was more than a mild-mannered, common-law judge (though he was that, too). His philosophy of the common law has a radical side.
I'd also recommend @cbarzun.bsky.social's excellent article, "Justice Souter's Common Law." It gets Souter exactly right.
virginialawreview.org/articles/jus...
Thanks, Joel! And that article owes much to you, not least for your pointing me to that speech (and to Osborne!).
Disturbingly relevant (again). Souter: "The day will come when somebody will come forward and we and the government will in effect say 'take the ball and run with it,' 'do what you have to do.' And that is the way democracy dies."
youtu.be/rWcVtWennr0?...
My review essay of Scott Hershovitz's very interesting recent book, Law is a Moral Practice. @shershovitz.bsky.social
lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/...
I had the same reaction. I listened with an open mind and EK was trying hard (maybe too hard) to be charitable, but the whole interview was embarrassing.
Yup. Agree on that.
So if it's a valid argument to trace an argument back to its (unseemly) origins, does that mean that B&W's tracing of the doctrine back to feudalism (if true) is also valid?
Below is from yesterday's NYT Editorial. The statement seems dead right to me. But the question I'm interested in is this: What assumptions does the idea that history is the proper judge of morality (and legality) depend on?
www.nytimes.com/2025/02/09/o...
The Crying Game, The Sixth Sense, _________?
Robert Oppenheimer, "The Open Mind" (1949):
Great thank you!
My interest in the idea of progress and its relevance to Constitutional Interpretation has led me to Judge David Barron's recent essay/lecture, "The Court of History." Super interesting:
nyulawreview.org/wp-content/u...
Great!
Could I get on there? (Or maybe I am—having trouble figuring this out).
(First post on this platform)
What does it mean to say that social or moral "progress" has occurred over some period of time? An important Q for political progressives, IMO. In this essay, I argue that it entails a judgment that social *learning* has taken place during that time.
t.co/00KH5ilnRJ
