COVERITLIVE.COM

11:43

Fred Barbash-Moderator - Good morning. Our guest today is Christopher Eisgruber, a scholar, the Provost at Princeton and more important for our purposes, a student of the Court (where he clerked for Justice Stevens) and particularly of the nomination process, about which he has expressed some important concerns in his book, "The Next Justice: Repairing the Supreme Court Appointment Process."

Having read the book, I would say that if you are truly interested in what is about to unfold in the process of confirmation, you need this book to fully appreciate how it got the way it is.

Chris will be with us at noon. We invite your questions in advance. Just write your name (not a handle or "guest") , and hit "send."

12:00

Fred Barbash-Moderator - Welcome Chris. And welcome back to all of our readers. I'd like to start the questioning by asking Chris to describe briefly the basic points he makes in his book about the nomination process; why it needs "repair" and how we go about repairing it. Chris, if you want to answer this in two parts, that's fine.

12:00

Chris Eisgruber - Thanks for the question, Fred, and for the opportunity to chat with readers.

12:02

Chris Eisgruber - The book’s main claim is that the appointments process must recognize that political values matter to judging, especially in Supreme Court cases. They matter not because justices ignore the law but because the law requires them to interpret abstract, value-laden concepts such as “the freedom of speech” or “the equal protection of the laws.” The problem with the current appointments process is not that it is political and conflictual—the Founders designed it that way. The problem is that the conflict has become dysfunctional, because based on a misunderstanding of what judges do. To repair it, we need to find ways to talk about the values that matter to judging.

Page 1 Next >