4 ms·

The ABA at this point is a partisan institution. Go read into some of their politics and realize that they are very much left-leaning. Edit: example https://ww

by kyrra 4y ago

The ABA at this point is a partisan institution. Go read into some of their politics and realize that they are very much left-leaning. Edit: example https://www.wsj.com/articles/anticompetitive-woke-law-schools-aba-identity-politics-affirmative-action-11626364370 https://www.wsj.com/articles/anticompetitive-woke-law-school...

enraged_camel 4y ago
Maybe instead of telling people to “go read into some of their politics” you can provide some examples and make the argument yourself?
- abathur 4y ago
  The "do your own research" meme works better when the initiator can make the target go refer to a corpus of questionable content (that is often already ideologically skewed), actively filter out whatever they find benign, and zero in on whatever lights up their confirmation bias.
  - mpalmer 4y ago
    It seems like you're trying to turn someone's objection to a weak argument into a weak argument itself by referring to it as an example of a "meme". I'm not sure I need to say anything else to be honest.
    - abathur 4y ago
      Sitting mighty high in the saddle for someone who didn't bother addressing anything I actually said. Edit: also unclear whether you realize I'm agreeing with the comment I responded to or not. /shrug
- kyrra 4y ago
  Added a context link. Here it is for you https://www.wsj.com/articles/anticompetitive-woke-law-schools-aba-identity-politics-affirmative-action-11626364370 https://www.wsj.com/articles/anticompetitive-woke-law-school...
  - malshe 4y ago
    That’s an opinion piece like a blogpost
    - kyrra 4y ago
      Does it make it not true. Feel free to argue against it. Newspapers like New York times and WSJ require their opinion letters cite facts for statements they make. If the ABA is pushing woke curriculum on law schools, is that not the ABA being leftist with their policies? I'll save you some trouble, the ABA replied here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/american-bar-association-aba-law-schools-woke-11626898295 https://www.wsj.com/articles/american-bar-association-aba-la...
noelsusman 4y ago
Next you'll try to convince me the Chamber of Commerce is a leftist institution.
mpalmer 4y ago
You have made an incomplete point. How exactly do their political positions figure into their ratings? Conservative judges are de facto unqualified? Left leaning judges get a pass? If you have a concrete criticism of their rating practices you don't need to focus on their politics, do you?
shadowgovt 4y ago
Yes, it turns out that professional vetting institutions have biases. If those biases appear partisan, it may be the case and that they are partisan for a reason having to do with the nature of the professional expertise that and the lack of said expertise on the other side of a partisan divide.
- rayiner 4y ago
  A disproportionate share of the intellectual horsepower in the legal profession is on the right. Which is why the conservative legal movement is so effective even though liberal lawyers outnumber conservative ones 10:1.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    I don't think I've seen evidence of this in my lifetime. If anything, legal decisions in the federal court system have been pretty liberal until recently. My generation saw the legalization, nationally, of gay marriage as well as the protection of personal property rights regarding firearms against government attempts to circumvent those rights for law-abiding citizens. Meanwhile, an attempt to modify the census (a fairly broad executive power) failed to pass muster in the court because someone wrote down basically the only way such a modification could be illegal (blatantly attempting to disenfranchise states along racial lines)... Was their actual intent. And we probably shouldn't go into the absolute debacle that was the attempt to override the electoral will of the 50 states in the 2020 election.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      See: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6793&context=lawreview https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti.... Go back and compare judicial decisions from the 1940s to 1970s to ones today. The ones today are much more grounded in statutory text, constitutional history, etc., and less reliant on policy arguments, notions of justice and fairness, etc. Even “liberal” legal decisions are far more conservative today than they were in the 1970s. Compare Roe and Obergefell (both written by socially liberal Republicans). Roe has lots of high minded hand waving about rights and dignity and whatnot. Obergefell meanwhile starts from deeply rooted traditions and spends a tremendous amount of ink making the case that gay marriage is sufficiently like traditional marriage that it should be covered by the same constitutional protection. This became starkly apparent when Roe was overturned. By that point, the ground had shifted so much that even liberals had a hard time defending Roe on the merits. They had instead retreated to stare decisis. Because even a lot of liberal lawyers today have a hard time swallowing the idea that judges should be in the business of inventing new rights to implement their vision of what’s just.

by kyrra 4y ago

enraged_camel 4y ago

Maybe instead of telling people to “go read into some of their politics” you can provide some examples and make the argument yourself?

abathur 4y ago
The "do your own research" meme works better when the initiator can make the target go refer to a corpus of questionable content (that is often already ideologically skewed), actively filter out whatever they find benign, and zero in on whatever lights up their confirmation bias.
- mpalmer 4y ago
  It seems like you're trying to turn someone's objection to a weak argument into a weak argument itself by referring to it as an example of a "meme". I'm not sure I need to say anything else to be honest.
  - abathur 4y ago
    Sitting mighty high in the saddle for someone who didn't bother addressing anything I actually said. Edit: also unclear whether you realize I'm agreeing with the comment I responded to or not. /shrug
kyrra 4y ago
Added a context link. Here it is for you https://www.wsj.com/articles/anticompetitive-woke-law-schools-aba-identity-politics-affirmative-action-11626364370 https://www.wsj.com/articles/anticompetitive-woke-law-school...
- malshe 4y ago
  That’s an opinion piece like a blogpost
  - kyrra 4y ago
    Does it make it not true. Feel free to argue against it. Newspapers like New York times and WSJ require their opinion letters cite facts for statements they make. If the ABA is pushing woke curriculum on law schools, is that not the ABA being leftist with their policies? I'll save you some trouble, the ABA replied here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/american-bar-association-aba-law-schools-woke-11626898295 https://www.wsj.com/articles/american-bar-association-aba-la...

noelsusman 4y ago

Next you'll try to convince me the Chamber of Commerce is a leftist institution.

mpalmer 4y ago

You have made an incomplete point. How exactly do their political positions figure into their ratings? Conservative judges are de facto unqualified? Left leaning judges get a pass? If you have a concrete criticism of their rating practices you don't need to focus on their politics, do you?

shadowgovt 4y ago

Yes, it turns out that professional vetting institutions have biases. If those biases appear partisan, it may be the case and that they are partisan for a reason having to do with the nature of the professional expertise that and the lack of said expertise on the other side of a partisan divide.

rayiner 4y ago
A disproportionate share of the intellectual horsepower in the legal profession is on the right. Which is why the conservative legal movement is so effective even though liberal lawyers outnumber conservative ones 10:1.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  I don't think I've seen evidence of this in my lifetime. If anything, legal decisions in the federal court system have been pretty liberal until recently. My generation saw the legalization, nationally, of gay marriage as well as the protection of personal property rights regarding firearms against government attempts to circumvent those rights for law-abiding citizens. Meanwhile, an attempt to modify the census (a fairly broad executive power) failed to pass muster in the court because someone wrote down basically the only way such a modification could be illegal (blatantly attempting to disenfranchise states along racial lines)... Was their actual intent. And we probably shouldn't go into the absolute debacle that was the attempt to override the electoral will of the 50 states in the 2020 election.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    See: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6793&context=lawreview https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti.... Go back and compare judicial decisions from the 1940s to 1970s to ones today. The ones today are much more grounded in statutory text, constitutional history, etc., and less reliant on policy arguments, notions of justice and fairness, etc. Even “liberal” legal decisions are far more conservative today than they were in the 1970s. Compare Roe and Obergefell (both written by socially liberal Republicans). Roe has lots of high minded hand waving about rights and dignity and whatnot. Obergefell meanwhile starts from deeply rooted traditions and spends a tremendous amount of ink making the case that gay marriage is sufficiently like traditional marriage that it should be covered by the same constitutional protection. This became starkly apparent when Roe was overturned. By that point, the ground had shifted so much that even liberals had a hard time defending Roe on the merits. They had instead retreated to stare decisis. Because even a lot of liberal lawyers today have a hard time swallowing the idea that judges should be in the business of inventing new rights to implement their vision of what’s just.