Replies

My first time around with Chemerinsky was during CA's Prop 209 (repealing preferential affirmative action), specifically, clause 'c'. Chemerinsky asserted that if Prop 209 were voted into Law, women's rights would be rolled back a million years. Men would be permitted in girl's locker rooms, etc. There's been lots of incidences of Chemerinsky "involvements" in cases since then, usually and only those cases with MSM interest. Confirmation Hearings. Anti-Rumsfeld ism. Electoral voting. Blah de blah.

I've read many of his opinions since 1995. I don't think he's very bright. But what he knows how to do is focus upon a particular set of wordings and base an entire platform upon his interpretation of a wee point. And write VOLUMES about his interpretation. This then, markets him up into the prime-time media venues, and permits his allied coalition socialist groups something to "hang on to" and bang their pots about". He's usually wrong. And despite the fact that his opinions and intepretations turn out wrong, doesn't seem to matter to those who vaunt Erwin Chemerinsky.

Tell me what he was involved in lately -- why does that name ring a bell?

I think he was one of the lawyers involved in the Wilson/Plame civil suit against Rove, Cheney and Libby.