When I think back to law school, I recall some of my professors as being downright mediocre, some as intellectually gifted but poor communicators, some as being very bright and incredibly hard-working, and a few as being on a different intellectual plane - where once you caught up with their ideas you might be pretty amazed, but at the same time wonder if their conceptions had any place in the real world. Other than the first group, were we choosing among law professors for Supreme Court nominees, how would we quantify which are the best legal minds? If we are focusing on brilliant, innovative thinkers, I think that last group wins out... and their opinions would likely make for the most interesting reading. But I'm not sure that's what we actually want.1
--------------
1. Can you imagine trying to practice law where every Supreme Court opinion came in the form of a plurality?
They would "never" take the job, but could you imagine JJ or Kahn (sp) on the bench?
ReplyDeleteCWD