DAVID STRAS

As anyone familiar with my scholarship knows, I am not a huge fan of inherent powers in most contexts.

Empirical evidence collected and analyzed by political scientists demonstrates that judicial pensions are the most important factor in a Justice's decision to retire, far more important than the party of the President or which political party has control of the Senate.

Many studies or theories by political scientists fit some subset of cases that a court decides, but literally no theory can account for all of them, particularly when it comes to studying a complex institution like the Supreme Court.

I have always thought that term limits for Justices sound good until you really give the issue some thought.

I find it hard to believe that Senators or the American public will classify Sotomayor as unqualified, particularly given the thin credentials of many of our eighteenth and nineteenth century Supreme Court Justices.

I remain mindful that the role of a judge is a limited one and that judges can't solve every problem. But at the same time, judges play a crucial role in safeguarding liberty and protecting the rights of all citizens.

The Court's objection to cameras may be much more a product of history and process than an unwillingness to be placed in the public spotlight.

I find it hard to believe that Senators or the American public will classify Sotomayor as unqualified, particularly given the thin credentials of many of our eighteenth and nineteenth century Supreme Court Justices.

I remain mindful that the role of a judge is a limited one and that judges can't solve every problem. But at the same time, judges play a crucial role in safeguarding liberty and protecting the rights of all citizens.

Empirical evidence collected and analyzed by political scientists demonstrates that judicial pensions are the most important factor in a Justice's decision to retire, far more important than the party of the President or which political party has control of the Senate.

I have always thought that term limits for Justices sound good until you really give the issue some thought.

As anyone familiar with my scholarship knows, I am not a huge fan of inherent powers in most contexts.

Many studies or theories by political scientists fit some subset of cases that a court decides, but literally no theory can account for all of them, particularly when it comes to studying a complex institution like the Supreme Court.

The Court's objection to cameras may be much more a product of history and process than an unwillingness to be placed in the public spotlight.