NINOMANIA
:: A constitutional law blog by Scalia/Thomas fan David M. Wagner, M.A., J.D., Research Fellow, National Legal Foundation, and Teacher, Veritas Preparatory Academy. Opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect those of the NLF or Veritas. :: bloghome | E-mail me ::
:: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 ::
“The Proof of the Common Law is by witness and jury: let Cobham be here, let him speak it. Call my accuser before my face.”
A serious challenge to Maryland v. Craig -- whoo hoo! Prof. Friedman, of Confrontation Blog, comments here.
Also (and hat-tip to Prof. Friedman), see this article in the ABA Journal about the Scalia-liberal coalition that is reviving originalism in Confronation Clause jurisprudence. Stanford Law prof. and Confrontation expert Jeffrey Fisher is quoted:“Someone said to me, ‘Isn’t it crazy that Scalia writes all your opinions?’ But that’s the way I wrote the arguments,” says Fisher, who co-chairs the amicus committee for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. A former clerk to Justice John Paul Stevens, Fisher worked at Seattle-based Davis Wright Tremaine, where he still is a partner....
Explaining the lineup, Fisher says that labeling won’t garner a majority. “You have to think about issues that cut across the divide,” he says. “You have to look at it not so much in terms of politics, but jurisprudentially.” [Emphasis added]
Indeed, Fisher aimed his pitch right at Scalia’s jurisprudential wheelhouse: an originalist theory of constitutional law, a duty to the Constitution’s text, and an adherence to bright-line rules. Add for good measure a reverence of 18th century colonial history.
As it happens, my next article, forthcoming in our law review here at Regent, looks at Crawford v. Washington for signs that Craig is toast. Craig delendus est!
:: David M. Wagner 3:56 PM [+] ::
...
A serious challenge to Maryland v. Craig -- whoo hoo! Prof. Friedman, of Confrontation Blog, comments here.
Also (and hat-tip to Prof. Friedman), see this article in the ABA Journal about the Scalia-liberal coalition that is reviving originalism in Confronation Clause jurisprudence. Stanford Law prof. and Confrontation expert Jeffrey Fisher is quoted:
“Someone said to me, ‘Isn’t it crazy that Scalia writes all your opinions?’ But that’s the way I wrote the arguments,” says Fisher, who co-chairs the amicus committee for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. A former clerk to Justice John Paul Stevens, Fisher worked at Seattle-based Davis Wright Tremaine, where he still is a partner....As it happens, my next article, forthcoming in our law review here at Regent, looks at Crawford v. Washington for signs that Craig is toast. Craig delendus est!
Explaining the lineup, Fisher says that labeling won’t garner a majority. “You have to think about issues that cut across the divide,” he says. “You have to look at it not so much in terms of politics, but jurisprudentially.” [Emphasis added]
Indeed, Fisher aimed his pitch right at Scalia’s jurisprudential wheelhouse: an originalist theory of constitutional law, a duty to the Constitution’s text, and an adherence to bright-line rules. Add for good measure a reverence of 18th century colonial history.
:: David M. Wagner 3:56 PM [+] ::
...
