[EL] Transcript in this morning's argument in Harris v. AIRC

[Samuel Bagenstos]

This case was also an example of what I like to call the "Specter Rule":
Elected officials should not argue in the Supreme Court.

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu> wrote:

> We members of the Republic Party will say what we want!
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 8, 2015, at 1:35 PM, Marty Lederman <lederman.marty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/14-232_c0ne.pdf
>
> Tip for Supreme Court advocates (and other lawyers):  You're not doing
> yourself or your clients any favors by referring to the "Democrat Party"
> and "Democrat members" of a commission or legislature.  Notwithstanding
> what you might hear in the echo chamber, the proper adjective is
> "Democratic."
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>



-- 
Samuel Bagenstos
sbagen at gmail.com
Twitter: @sbagen
My University of Michigan homepage:
http://www.law.umich.edu/FacultyBio/Pages/FacultyBio.aspx?FacID=sambagen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20151208/58f06df2/attachment.html>