In several scathing opinions, Eddins has decried the conservative supermajority's radical reversal of settled precedent in the name of originalism, both dangerously retrograde and unworkable.
Eddins highlights the impracticality of judges serving as amateur historians, lacking the training and rigor required for evaluating historical methodology in legal decisions.
Eddins questions the Supreme Court's cherry-picking of history and raises concerns about whose history is being considered, pointing out the lack of diversity in historical perspectives.
Collection
[
|
...
]