TEXT :: William Eskridge’s Body Politics: Lawrence v. Texas and the Constitution of Disgust and Contagion is an unusually rhetorical piece. At times it appears that Eskridge thinks that if he characterizes his opponents’ position as one of “disgust” and fear of “contagion” often enough (by my count, 142 and 58 times, respectively), that will make it so. On numerous occasions, he goes beyond the pale of responsible scholarship, in my opinion, not only characterizing his opponents’ position himself (from an external standpoint), but also formulating their own position in those terms, and doing so utterly without justification.
Of course, articles can be highly rhetorical and still have keen analysis. Unfortunately, we have to wait a long time to get around to any serious constitutional argument by Professor Eskridge in his article, and in the end, that argument is not particularly satisfactory.
April 2014, Vol. 66, No. 2
Sergio J. Campos, Class Actions and Justiciability
Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, Constitutional Culpability: Questioning the New Exclusionary Rules
Alberto R. Gonzales & Amy L. Moore, No Right at All: Putting Consular Notification in its Rightful Place After Medellin
Kevin J. Lynch, The Lock-in Effect of Preliminary Injunctions
Anne R. Traum, Using Outcomes to Reframe Guilty Plea Adjudication
Katrina Wyman & Nicolas Williams, Migrating Boundaries
Stephen E. Ludovici, Rule 60(b)(4): When the Courts of Limited Jurisdiction Yield to Finality