Bench Memos

Judge Posner’s Weak Mea Culpa

Seventh Circuit judge Richard A. Posner has made news recently with his declaration that he was mistaken in writing a majority opinion that upheld Indiana’s voter-ID law (and that was affirmed by the Supreme Court, with the lead opinion by Justice Stevens). In his new book Reflections on Judging, Posner asserts that the law is of “a type … now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.” And in an interview, he explains his supposed mistake by asserting that “we weren’t really given strong indications that requiring additional voter identification would actually disenfranchise people entitled to vote” and that “we weren’t given the information that would enable that balance to be struck” between preventing fraud and protecting voters’ rights.

As a general rule, I’m all for people acknowledging their errors, and I’ve tried to make a practice of acknowledging and correcting my own. (Even as to his nonjudicial work, Posner clearly hasn’t adopted such a practice.) Some cross-cutting complications are involved, I think, in a judge’s confession of his own judicial errors, but I’ll pass over those here and assume that such confessions are, on balance, welcome. But I’d like to highlight some oddities of Posner’s admission of error.

It’s fair to presume that Posner gave careful attention to the competing arguments for and against the Indiana voter-ID law at the time he ruled on it. From his own account of his general practice in his new book, he would have read the briefs, discussed the case with his law clerks, done whatever additional research he thought necessary, challenged the attorneys at oral argument, and meticulously worked through the issues in writing his opinion. In addition, of course, before issuing the opinion, he had the opportunity to review the dissent by Judge Terence Evans (who he now says “was right”).

By contrast, one has to wonder what underlies his assertion in his book some six years later that he got it wrong. The few words he writes—that the law “was a type of law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention”—seem sloppy and ill-considered. In a book replete with footnotes, he doesn’t bother to cite any support for his proposition. Nor does the stark dichotomy he posits seem a sound one: As his opinion recognized, any fraud-prevention measure will have the incidental effect of deterring some people from voting.

As for Posner’s contention that he wasn’t “given the information” needed to assess the case properly: Paul M. Smith, the accomplished appellate lawyer who represented the law’s challengers in the Supreme Court, thoroughly refutes Posner.

So why should anyone think that Posner’s judgment on the issue is better now that it was when he decided the case?

Posner’s recent remarks may instead stand as an indictment of the unstable and open-ended judicial approach that he advocates in his new book, a supposedly “pragmatic” approach in which how a judge should decide a case “will often depend on moral feelings, common sense, sympathies, and other ingredients of thought and feeling that can’t readily be translated into a weighing of measurable consequences” (p. 6).

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

The Worst Cover-Up of All Time

President Donald Trump may be guilty of many things, but a cover-up in the Mueller probe isn’t one of them. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, attempting to appease forces in the Democratic party eager for impeachment, is accusing him of one, with all the familiar Watergate connotations. The charge is strange, ... Read More

Theresa May: A Political Obituary

On Friday, Theresa May, perhaps the worst Conservative prime minister in recent history, announced her resignation outside of number 10 Downing Street. She will step down effective June 7. “I have done my best,” she insisted. “I have done everything I can. . . . I believe it was right to persevere even ... Read More
PC Culture

TV Before PC

Affixing one’s glance to the rear-view mirror is usually as ill-advised as staring at one’s own reflection. Still, what a delight it was on Wednesday to see a fresh rendition of “Those Were the Days,” from All in the Family, a show I haven’t watched for nearly 40 years. This time it was Woody Harrelson ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Democrats’ Other Class War

There is a class war going on inside the Democratic party. Consider these two cris de couer: Writing in the New York Times under the headline “America’s Cities Are Unlivable — Blame Wealthy Liberals,” Farhad Manjoo argues that rich progressives have, through their political domination of cities such as ... Read More

The Deepfake of Nancy Pelosi

You’ve almost made it to a three-day weekend! Making the click-through worthwhile: A quick note about how National Review needs your help, concerns about “deepfakes” of Nancy Pelosi, one of the most cringe-inducing radio interviews of all time, some news about where to find me and the book in the near ... Read More
White House

For Democrats, the Party’s Over

If the Democrats are really tempted by impeachment, bring it on. Since the day after the 2016 election they have been threatening this, placing their chips on the Russian-collusion fantasy and then on the phantasmagoric charade of obstruction of justice. The attorney general accurately gave the ingredients of the ... Read More