E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
This is just a brief response to Sandy Levinson's post on Constitution. All of us in the "Constitution business" benefit from this law, so cheering the law can be seen as self-serving. But, that is only a minor issue. In the past few years I have given Constitution Day talks at a number of schools that have, as far as anyone knows, never before had sponsored any serous discussion about the Constitution, fundamental liberties, or the relationship between politics and the Constitution. Constitution day forces a shift in resources -- buildings, money, time. This is not a bad thing. Students and faculty get to think about the Constitution and hear arguments and discussions about all sorts of constitutional issues. This is surely a good thing. It is much like the Brandeis notion that the answer to bad speech is more speech; the answer to constitutional ignorance is more discussion of the constitution, not less. I gave a talk on civil liberties in war time at a school with a huge ROTC program. Many students -- future officers -- had never considered that torture might harm them if they are captured in warfare. They never considered that torture might actually be counter productive in securing intelligence, or that anti-war discussions might be good for our society. The students were stunned. No one had raised these issues before. There was no classroom venue (although there should be) where these issues could be discussed. And these students were not likely to go to a meeting to discuss the war or civil liberties. But, hundreds were in my lecture. They were "conscripts," because attendance was taken. I have had this experience every years since Constitution day began. I am sure Sandy has too. It would be better to have Constitution week, or maybe "constitution day" should be every semester instead of once a year. But, what we have now is a fine first step in encouraging discussion about how the Constitution affects our culture. So, one or two cheers for Senator Byrd and his law.
I basically agree with Paul. I'd give at least one cheer, maybe as many as two cheers, for Constitution Day. But I'm going to refrain from the third cheer until it becomes an occasion for some serious scrutiny of the "hard-wired" provisions as well as celebrations of what is best in the Constitution (such as freedom of speech).