Robert Bork on Judicial Arrogance

July 23, 2014 With Robert Bork

The famously rejected nominee takes on the Supreme Courts of the U.S., Canada and Israel and finds them representative of a great failing in western jurisprudence: i.e. seeking to make new law and, thus, to “legislate” instead of “adjudicate.” He had just published (in 2003) a book laying out the argument that he presents quite forcefully in this discussion.And, speaking of counter-factuals, how might our history have been different if he had been allowed onto the Supreme Court?