« Student Blogger - Law and Econ Workshop: How Much Judicial Review? | Main | Ambiguity in Legal Interpretation: Opening remarks »

April 23, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Professor, Judge Posner, I think the emphasis in this debate is partially wrong or off the mark, not in the Greek sense of sinful but still problematic. The impact of ambiguity is important to me. I have discussed with you or in articles how over 2 million people are in prison and over 1.5 million are in nursing homes and from 1.6 million to 5 million are under adult guardianships. Ambiguity has effects. Guardians really can ambiguously remove the rights and resources of almost everyone or anyone. A guardian can just assert the person has some ambiguous difference or disability or thing the person-guardian does not like and take away the persons' resources and rights. Ambiguity has discriminatory potential. Patrick Fitzgerald's prosecutions have taken advantage of ambiguity. One can ALWAYS say this government is corrupt. Person A interacted with Person B, therefore the government is corrupt. Then we jail many people as a result of such ambiguities. Person A did not disclose fact B and Person A ends up doing a fraud conviction. Person A controls resource C and Person A ends up in a federal prison. Person A neglected Person O and Person A is in a state prison for neglect. Ambiguity has impacts and I think we need to recognize that juries tend to convict people in response to ambiguity. let me be honest i would have overturned some of Pat Fitzgerald's rulings and also guardianship taking away rights in some cases. Sorry if there is any conflict of interest...I am in no way trying to create a conflict of interest in some way. I am an active author writing on topics each day as a potential source of food and drink and resources.

The comments to this entry are closed.