, Legal Times

New Study Revisits Scalia-Posner Feud

   | 5 Comments

Legal writing expert Bryan Garner today launched the latest round in the long-running feud between federal appeals judge Richard Posner on one side and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and Garner, his friend and co-author, on the other.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Uncle Bill

    Now it‘s back. Hmmmm.

    P.S. Here‘s an equivalent photo for Posner:

    http://www.law.columbia.edu/ipimages/Communications/Press Releases 08/Posner_IMG_0014.JPG

  • Uncle Bill

    This strangely disappeared the first time I posted it: I think this is a little more like it: One uses objective standards that are fundamental principles of law and our democracy; while the other goes for who can tell the most pathetic story. One preserves a system that has worked for over 200 years, the first such in the history of the world; while the other sees law as an instrument for change according to the fashion of the day.

    Wonder what was so offensive about that......

  • Uncle Bill

    I think this is a little more like it: One uses objective standards that are fundamental principles of law and our democracy; while the other goes for who can tell the most pathetic story. One preserves a system that has worked for over 200 years, the first such in the history of the world; while the other sees law as an instrument for change according to the fashion of the day.

  • Nomalas Sivad:

    Dear Jurisprudence, somehow I get the feeling that you are an attorney.
    Well said.

  • Jurisimprudence

    So, to sum up, under one form of judicial reasoning, the judge will torture the text of the law until it reaches the result he or she wants and under the other form the judge is realistic that his or her opinion is not going to find perfect harmony with the text of the law but said judge will nonetheless reach the result he or she wants.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202654515592

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.