Monday, January 10, 2005
previous entry | main | next entry | TrackBack (0)
That silly Alan Dershowitz
Look, the Harvard Law School has taken its fair share of lumps in the past year -- so critiquing Alan Dershowitz's critique of John Grisham's latest potboiler in the New York Times Book Review seems a bit like piling on.
However, I can't let this paragraph slide:
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that students who decide to matriculate at Harvard's law school might -- just might -- have formed their opinions about the law from a greater range of experience than reading Grisham's oeuvre. At a minimum, I'm sure they've read Scott Turow's vastly superior legal thrillers.
Second, it's clearly been a long, long time since Dershowitz checked out the political science literature on the judiciary. I'm hardly an expert on the poli sci literature on the courts, but even I am dimly aware that the trend in the past few decades has been to study judges as rational actors intent on pursuing political agendas -- not exactly above politics (click here for some examples of this literature) Comparative political scientists do tend to assume that American judges are less corrupt than many of their foreign counterparts -- because that appears to be true. However, political scientists have long abandoned the concept that judges do not think or act in a political or strategic manner. And I'm pretty sure that this is reflected in undergraduate courses.
Kafka's The Trial is much better suited reading to prepare the young lawyer-to-be for his or her horrifying descent into the meaninglessness of the large lawfirm job awaiting.posted by: PD Shaw on 01.10.05 at 10:30 AM [permalink]
Some classics that refute the a-political conception of judges include:
I'd say this is true of political scientists who use texts written by political scientists (e.g. Epstein and Walker's Constitutional Law for a Changing America), but attitudinalism hasn't penetrated nearly as much in lawprof-written books, which tend to be the ones used by most JDs (and even a lot of PhDs) teaching con law to undergraduates. And even Epstein and Walker oversell the court's power as an agent of social change.posted by: Chris Lawrence on 01.10.05 at 10:30 AM [permalink]
Hmmm ... I wonder if John Grisham is as psyched about torture as the Dershmeister?posted by: praktike on 01.10.05 at 10:30 AM [permalink]
Post a Comment: