The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Which is harder, federal courts or science?
During his talk at our law school's graduation last June, my colleague Eric Posner distinguished between "hard" questions and "super-hard" questions. His example of a "hard" question was federal courts, and his examples of "super-hard" questions were from other disciplines, such as the questions of molecular biology at issue in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics that prompted a controversial concurrence by Justice Scalia.
One theme of the talk was that law school equips lawyers to answer the hard but not the super-hard questions. (You can see the talk here on Youtube, starting at 39:50.)
Anyway, today the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, a federal courts case, which included this remark from Justice Breyer:
JUSTICE BREYER: Let me try once more. I did understand all these molecules. I ought to be able to understand this. I don't know if I can. . . .
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?