Re: Dover Intelligent-Design Case

[Steven Jamar]

Interesting that you think that a judge's  job does not include being aware of the political impact of his or her decision! Am I correct in inferring, then, that you consider Brown v. Board wrongly decided on the merits and wrongly written in form and wrongly decided within the Court's processes since the external impact was certainly considered by the court? Just because a decision is defensible on its merits does not mean that one need not defend oneself. In such contentious matters a court should give a full and candid accounting of its reasoning. This is a district court making findings of fact on a 6-week record in a highly visible, important case.  It is not a removed abstracted appellate decision. On Dec 21, 2005, at 8:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/20/2005 6:19:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: With regard to the judge's commentary, what I find the most disturbing is that this particular judge -- a Bush appointee with pretty firm "conservative" credentials -- felt it necessary to preemptively defend not just his decision, but himself, in his opinion.  What does that say for the current social climate and principles of judicial independence?   As for determining what is or is not "science," judges do that all the time when they decide whether or not to allow expert testimony. Actually, I find disturbing the fact that the judge is thinking about whether or not he might need to defend himself.  His decision is either defensible on its own merits, or it is indefensible.  The judge's comments in this regard suggest that he has been reading something other than transcripts, briefs and cases, or listening to something other than his iPod.  Having picked up the flavor of disapproval for a certain category of outcomes on religion cases, he has decided to import squarely into his opinion an argument in justification that simply would not be there if he only did his job and ignored Fox News and/or Radio America.   Jim Henderson Senior Counsel ACLJ _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. --  Prof. Steven D. Jamar                                     vox:  202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law                           fax:  202-806-8428 2900 Van Ness Street NW                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC  20008           http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar "Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him." Martin Luther King, Jr.

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.