We all know that it's a charade. Still, (with all due respect to our Legal Beagle friends), it's worth asking whether Sotomayor is reading from a random-text generator, whereby words may have meaning, if one thinks they do, according to the Queen of Hearts theory.
Sen. Feingold: I'd like to hear your thoughts a bit on whether you see any common themes or important lessons in the Court's decisions in Rasul, Hamdi, Hamdan and Boumediene. What is your general understanding of that line of cases?
Judge Sotomayor: That the Court is doing its task as judges. It's looking, in each of those cases, at what the actions are of either the military, and what Congress has done or not done, and applied constitutional review to those actions
Well, yah, I guess so.
Sen. Feingold: But what would be the general test for incorporation?....
Judge Sotomayor: One must remember that the Supreme Court's analysis in its prior precedent predated its principles or the development of cases discussing the incorporation doctrine
Is that obfuscation, asininity, or pure BS?
Judge Sotomayor: No, I was just suggesting that I do recognize that the court's more recent jurisprudence in incorporation with respect to other amendments has taken -- has been more recent
Perhaps her logic courses were all circular, or something.
HT: Arms/Law
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment