Sunday, May 23, 2010

Who's Activist Now?: the Roberts Court in History PANEL DISCUSSION

The organizers describe the event, entitled Who's Activist Now?: The Roberts Court in History, thusly:

For a generation or more, conservatives have condemned liberal judges as “activists”—dedicated to an ideological agenda, dismissive of precedent and the provisions of the Constitution, and eager to overturn the acts of duly elected legislatures.  Today, however, the left is using the same terminology to criticize the conservative Roberts Court; recently President Obama himself attacked activist conservative judges.  This panel will examine whether there is any meaningful content to this debate, whether liberals are truly dedicated (as many say they are) to “judicial restraint,” and what history—particularly the era that came to an end in 1937, the last great era of conservative jurisprudence—can teach us about our own times.


Johnroberts_scotus


The event is sponsored by Alliance for Justice, the New York Lawyer Chapter of the American Constitution Society, the Brennan Center for Justice,  and New York University School of Law. 

It's at NYU on June 23, 2010.  RSVP required: information here.

RR

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/2010/05/whos-activist-now-the-roberts-court-in-history-panel-discussion.html

Conferences, Interpretation | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0134817d46f2970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who's Activist Now?: the Roberts Court in History PANEL DISCUSSION:

Comments

I am irked , not badly annoyed as I realize humans are still on the road to real law and justice and even a mass understanding of what that means.
So I just happen to live in the still ‘Dark’ ages. However it would be ‘advancing’, if we could get the populace to use fewer words and perhaps simplicity would bring cognition.
‘Activist, liberal. Conservative, ideology’.
Panel discussion of U.S Supreme Court Judges, their actions and reasons?
Please people stop trying to be Socrates in the Athenian olive grove. Law is not and should not be a philosophical debate. Law is a tool, and all judges should, before they get to their ‘tool bench’ have been taught where to find the appropriate ‘Rule’ the current ‘rule’, the correct tool.
They should not spend their time using a wrench for a screwdriver. And for those that follow law our time is best spent pointing out all the times judges use the wrong tool and find a way to hold judges to using the right tool. If a judge feels the tool given to him or her is a poor design that judge needs to go to the tool maker (Congress) and complain. Not wink and smile and pump the bellows on his or her own design.
Laws of nature, Laws of man, it is hard enough getting these laws made they deserve better that a wink a smile and a blow. carol

Posted by: carol Budro | May 24, 2010 5:05:29 AM

Post a comment