law & order tip

Following the Roberts confirmation hearing

Law nerds around the coun­try are pro­vid­ing inter­est­ing com­men­tary of the Roberts con­fir­ma­tion. SCO­TUS­blog pro­vides a blow-by-blow account of the pos­tur­ing and inter­mit­tent ques­tion­ing of the sen­a­tors along­side inter­est­ing legal com­men­tary, but it's a blog, so you have to scroll down to the bot­tom and read upwards if you want to read chrono­log­i­cal­ly. Balkiniza­tion, a blog that includes many quite inter­est­ing essays by Yale Law pro­fes­sor Jack Balkin, has an inter­est­ing dis­cus­sion about why Democ­rats should not con­firm Roberts. Balkin recent­ly pub­lished an inter­est­ing piece in Slate about orig­i­nal­ists and the con­cept of a liv­ing con­sti­tu­tion: "Alive and Kick­ing: Why no one tru­ly believes in a dead Con­sti­tu­tion."If you're will­ing to sift through the details — and each meme­ber of the Sen­ate Judi­cia­ry Com­mit­tee tends go into exces­sive detail before get­ting to his/her ques­tion — the NYT has raw tran­scripts: Day 1, Day 2.