VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
paul finkelman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 9 Mar 2003 00:30:57 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (65 lines)
The Chief Justice is not the Court; taney decided Merryman on circuit, by
himself; so his decision has not more validity than any other circuit decision,
at best.

Kevin Hardwick wrote:

> I'm fascinated by the following comment from JDS, which I assume was
> written in reply to me:
>
> >        Were Harry Jaffa the Chief Justice of the United States his
> > interpretation might have some weight.  However, he isn't and Taney was.
> > Case closed on that point as far as I can tell.
>
> You would seem to be saying that Taney's interpretation of the Constitution
> is the definitive one, because of the office that he held.  In your view,
> if the Chief Justice were to affirm that, per his interpretation of the
> Constitution, the moon is made of cheese (or some equally nonsensical
> conclusion), would that make it, constitutinally speaking, true?
>
> You really *must* read Jaffa.  Jaffa's argument is in part about the nature
> of fundamental constitutional truths, which he thinks do exist.  You would
> seem to be very much of precisely the turn of mind that Jaffa (and other
> conservatives--Robert Bork comes to mind) think are the real problem in the
> academy today.
>
> Dismissal of higher law is quite common in America today.  The notion that
> there is no link between power and truth is academically fashionable, and
> has been for a long while.  But if that is the case, then the Constitution
> is simply *an* arrangement of power, in the service or arbitrary ends.  Why
> should I care one way or the other what it means then--its just, in the
> most cynical fashion imaginable, about how the powerful legitimate their
> power.
>
> If you really believe that, then surely you see that you have no grounds at
> all for criticizing Lincoln?
>
> Warm regards,
> Kevin
>
> --
> Kevin R. Hardwick, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of History, MSC 2001
> James Madison University
> Harrisonburg VA 22807
> Phone:  540/568-6306
> Email:  [log in to unmask]
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

--
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, OK  74104-3189

phone 918-631-3706
Fax   918-631-2194
e-mail:   [log in to unmask]

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US