In the New York Times, Adam Liptak has a piece on the trend of Supreme Court opinions accepting and restating facts appearing in amicus briefing, some of which facts are later revealed to be erroneous or based on questionable studies: "Seeking Facts, Justices Settle for What Briefs Tell Them." This is a phenomenon that was heavily criticized by Justice Scalia in his dissent in Sykes v. United States, No. 09-11311 (2011):
UPDATE [7/22/14]: Professor Hamburger has a further piece on distinguishing the rule of law from rule by law.
by professor Randy Barnett here.
“The King to the sheriff, greetings.
Editor's note: early in the life of this blog we attempted to provide a famous quotation from legal history, sometimes with extensive commentary and historical perspective (see here) in a piece entitled "Legal Quote of the Week." It's
At Mosaic Magazine, Joshua Berman writes on a variety of issues in Jewish law or halakha, and in particular the distinction between statutory and common-law approaches to the law.
For fun, as we complete our (very) last minute tax year transactions, let’s ponder some tax quotations from 20th century politicians—