Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« "Shooting Liberally" | Main | Pro-gun rally in Chicago, July 11 »

Modern legal scholarship

Posted by David Hardy · 19 June 2008 02:21 PM

Here's a synopsis of an upcoming Villanova L. Rev. article. It isn't often that I can read a synopsis of an article and have not the foggiest what it is saying---

"Engaging with Michael Seidman’s contribution to the symposium, I close the essay in suggesting that when, as in Mark Tushnet’s suggestive orientation to “the Other” just before the end of the essay “Defending Korematsu?,” he sees the Other face to face, he extends an invitation to read in his most recent constitutional law scholarship a resurgence of the orientation to Others that was the ground of his scholarly work, and thus to conclude that one does not have to move from the realm of hermeneutics to that of metaphor, as Seidman suggests is necessary, to identify his commitment to what is paradoxically a certain kind of “thick” constitutionalism, which conceives of it as something more than a bare practice for allocating political power in the nation-state, necessarily implying some ethical engagement between subjects who govern and those who are governed.

That commitment is premised on a “thin constitution” that promises two things. First, that it might shield us and Others from at least the worst excesses of the violence of state tyranny. Second, it encodes what may be cynical rhetoric, aspirational constitutive national text, denial that is admission of the originary national pathology that eats out the nation’s core, or all of these things. That is, a commitment to equality in a nation with a government which Thurgood Marshall called “defective from the start,” founded on chattel slavery and persistently unwilling to address that inheritance from the Founders, a pervasive structural subordination of Others that imbricates its fiber yet."

· General con law

6 Comments | Leave a comment

Tom | June 19, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply

The author of that abstract ought to use less obscure imbricated language and focus on the hermeneutic discourse. Metaphorically speaking, of course.
Reading the entire abstract gave me a headache. I can hardly wait to read the actual article.

Jim | June 19, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply

I'll pass, thanks for the warning.

CDR D | June 19, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply

I once worked for an old Navy Commodore at a major training command who used to caution us prior to delivering any critique, "...if you can't make your points plainly in two minutes or less, you are bullsh***ing."

From the above, I'd guess the author of that piece is in dire need of a serious colonic.

Nomen Nescio | June 19, 2008 8:05 PM | Reply

you sure that's not the legal version of a Sokal hoax?

geekwitha.45 | June 19, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply

It appears to be valid postmodernese.

If it's a hoax, well, then 80% of academia is a hoax too.

Hey....waitaminute.....

Nomen Nescio | June 19, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply

thank the FSM the branches of academentia i've studied are not much given to postmodernism.

well, except for Larry Wall. but even among computer programmers, he's a bit of a weirdo.

Leave a comment