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
Inside Baseball Observations/Speculations on Today's Supreme Court Opinions
Mark Tushnet
I have nothing of substance to say now about the Court's opinions today. Several thoughts, though:
1. In Kebodeaux, how many sentences does Justice Breyer begin with "And." And, how many other Justices are fond of doing so? (Lots, and none, I think.)
2. Why did it take so long to hand Fisher down? Speculations based upon nothing other than the opinions and the timing: (a) The ultimate opinion isn't how it looked at the outset. Initially there was a more substantive discussion of Texas's program, but it wouldn't fly (meaning, I would think, that Justice Kennedy ended up thinking that he didn't have good answers to the criticisms he got, perhaps from both sides). Counterargument: There's nothing in Justice Thomas's opinion suggesting that he was writing about some now-gone portions of a proposed opinion. Counter to that: He did a good job of scrubbing the opinion of such references, which contributed to the length of time it took to get the cases out.
(b) Justice Thomas's opinion simply took a long time to write. There's a lot of mining of old briefs, and there were lots to go through, and then he had to choose precisely which quotations to use.
(c) The Justices (not entirely consciously and sometimes contrary to their stated views) love public attention, and holding the opinion up (for "polishing," no doubt) heightens suspense and public attention.