Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marmar

(77,092 posts)
Tue Sep 2, 2014, 10:39 AM Sep 2014

Supremes Rely On Facts That 'Wouldn't Pass Muster In A High School Paper'


(NYT) WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court received more than 80 friend-of-the-court briefs in the Hobby Lobby case. Most of these filings, also called amicus briefs, were dull and repetitive recitations of familiar legal arguments.

Others stood out. They presented fresh, factual information that put the case in a broader context.

The justices are hungry for such data. Their opinions are increasingly studded with citations of facts they learned from amicus briefs.

But this is a perilous trend, said Allison Orr Larsen, a law professor at the College of William and Mary.

“The court is inundated with 11th-hour, untested, advocacy-motivated claims of factual expertise,” she wrote in an article to be published in The Virginia Law Review. .........................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/us/politics/the-dubious-sources-of-some-supreme-court-facts.html



3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supremes Rely On Facts That 'Wouldn't Pass Muster In A High School Paper' (Original Post) marmar Sep 2014 OP
It was Dionne Warwick who did "I say a little Prayer for you", not the Supremes..... still_one Sep 2014 #1
But... but... procon Sep 2014 #2
Sad, this SCOTUS can be (and was) Astroturfed underpants Sep 2014 #3

still_one

(92,433 posts)
1. It was Dionne Warwick who did "I say a little Prayer for you", not the Supremes.....
Tue Sep 2, 2014, 10:46 AM
Sep 2014

Sorry, couldn't resist

procon

(15,805 posts)
2. But... but...
Tue Sep 2, 2014, 11:19 AM
Sep 2014

If it's on the internet, it must be true... right?

That's the biggest problem I have with discussing ANYTHING with right wingers, if they can see it on the internet, by God, it's a fact. And if the info is repeated on lots of conservative websites, that's pure gold in validating their POV. It must be epidemic.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Supremes Rely On Facts Th...