{"id":868,"date":"2011-02-13T16:03:59","date_gmt":"2011-02-13T20:03:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.peoplevstate.com\/?p=868"},"modified":"2011-11-13T22:05:24","modified_gmt":"2011-11-14T02:05:24","slug":"law-prof-is-right-on-robes-for-wrong-reason","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.peoplevstate.com\/?p=868","title":{"rendered":"Law prof is right on robes for wrong reason."},"content":{"rendered":"
I don’t take issue with Harvard law prof Noah Feldman’s concluding suggestion in his op-ed in the NYT<\/a> that maybe we should do away with judges’ black robes, as I’ve suggested the same thing myself<\/a>. However, our rationales are fundamentally different. My rationale is that judges shouldn’t be politicians but generally are<\/a>, and therefore don’t deserve as a class to wear something apparently designed to mislead people into believing they’re something other than what they are. Feldman’s rationale appears to be that judges not only are but should <\/em>be politicians and should<\/em> hobnob, “dr[i]nk regularly,” play poker and hunt ducks with other politicians, and therefore should lose the robes so people don’t think they should be anything other than what they are.<\/p>\n