In this episode, Harvard Law's Prof. Mark Tushnet discusses his book 'Who Am I to Judge? Judicial Craft versus Constitutional Theory.' He critiques Supreme Court originalism and explores how justices' narrow backgrounds impact their decisions. Tushnet argues for a broader evaluation of Supreme Court nominees that considers diverse life experiences. He reflects on the evolution of judicial review since the 1970s and its implications for current legal challenges, particularly in the context of the Trump administration. The podcast also touches on the importance of inclusivity in the legal profession.
"In my book, 'Who Am I to Judge?', I argue that the originalist perspective fails to consider the broader societal contexts and experiences that judges should bring to their role."
"Critiques of the Supreme Court’s composition reveal a troubling uniformity in judicial perspectives, leading to limitations in the variety of experiences and judgements made."
Collection
[
|
...
]