Sandy writes, "One has a choice, I
believe:  To teach a course on whether one can really take the enterprise
of constitutional interpretation seriously or a course on the institutional
role (and behavior) of the United States Supreme Court.  The latter is not
without value, but I think the former is far more important." I'm not sure I 
understand the distinction Sandy makes. I believe the Supreme Court's constitutional 
cases depend little on doctrine and mostly on the political judgments of nine 
relatively bright people (like a council of elders).  Assuming Sandy, and others 
agree, I think it is a difficult question how that view, if at all, should be 
presented to students. I do it rather overtly and tell my students not to be cynical 
but be realistic. A council of elders is a good idea (maybe), in a government of 
separated powers. But, I do wonder what others do.

Eric

Reply via email to