The men who wrote the Constitution had very little law school background. Only a few had “read” in Law at some college. All were self-taught, either in whole or part.
Why is it today that someone must be a certified “professional” with law degree, with standing before some Bar, to comment upon, to discuss EXPERTLY the Constitution and the Law? I will tell you there is no GOOD reason.
So what is his legal history? How successful cases? How many publications? Help me understand why he is such a prominent Constitutional scholar.
He might be all you think he is - it is just that details seem scarce. Be is almost Obama like in that regard.