Crowning George II was the least of the Supremes’ mistakes, according to local attorney and novelist Scott Turow, writing in the Washington Post National Weekly (December 25-January 1). The real transgression was the way they did it. “Legal Realism, the dominant school of jurisprudence in the 20th century, recognized that when judges are free to choose, they will fashion rules that mirror their own ideologies.” Hence the Legal Realists did their best to “erect a tradition that minimized the occasions when judges could do that. Judicial restraint, deference to legislation and strict adherence to procedural norms were some of the ways Realists sought to restrict judicial decision-making.” But in the Florida case, “the court was unable to articulate any neutral principle that seems to justify Bush’s victory–and that could be accepted by all sides. There was no ‘one man, one vote’; no ‘all men are equal’; not even a court declaration that our president-elect got the most votes in Florida. We were left only with, ‘Time’s up.’” Now that the Legal Realist restraints have been broken, “lower courts, especially those inclined to decide in ways they believe the Supreme Court will favor, will be tempted to make decisions with a more openly political flavor.”
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
As others see us–time to consult with an ear specialist. Writing in the Utne Reader (January-February), Peter Katz names Chicago one of the country’s ten “most underrated cities,” in part because of our “elevated trains, rumbling poetically above the streets.”
