Walker's Op-Ed on Scalia's Ruling

You'll recall that last week, Sam Walker told Radley Balko that Scalia had gotten his research considerably wrong in his opinion in Hudson v Michigan. Walker has now written an op-ed piece for the LA Times making the same argument. That prompted Orin Kerr to argue that Walker's complaint is invalid because it's not dishonest for someone to cite a scholar on the facts while disagreeing with his solution:

Scalia cites Walker's book accurately about existing police practices, but then takes the normative position that in light of those changes there is no need to further expand the exclusionary rule. In other words, Scalia agrees with and cites Walker's descriptive argument but then disagrees with Walker's normative views. But contrary to the suggestion of Walker's op-ed, Scalia does not suggest that Walker would agree with Scalia's view about the normative scope of the exclusionary rule.

Which prompted Balko to respond:

But I don't think that's an accurate description of Walker's complaint. His compaint is that Scalia inaccurately (or incompletely) cites his work to further a point that doesn't rise from Walker's research.

Were we to boil Walker's research down to one sentence, it would read something like, "While under close supervision and oversight from the courts, police seem to behave themselves."

Scalia took the portion of Walker's research that says "police seem to behave themselves," and used it to justify less supervision and oversight from the courts.

That, I think is a legitimate gripe.

I do too.

Tags

More like this

In yesterday's post on afterimages and aftereffects, I mentioned that demonstrations of neural adaptation for a particular feature (in the post, I used the examples of color and motion) is generally take
Almost three years ago, we conducted our first-ever Casual Fridays study, where we asked who says "hi" to you while you're outside exercising. The results confirmed my suspicions:
The results of the first Casual Friday survey are in, and I have to say, I'm impressed at the level of response. Greta mentioned to one of her colleagues that we had collected 213 responses in five days, and his eyes lit up with excitement.

Misrepresentation is a huge bullwark of ideologues - ideologues of any stripe.