SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bearded One who wrote (20210)6/24/1998 11:29:00 PM
From: Gerald R. Lampton  Read Replies (2) of 24154
 
One more question: How can the court say that the courts are ill-prepared to deal with technical matters and in the same breath say that the appointment of Special Master Lessig was inappropriate?

Appointment of a special master is inappropriate, not because of the court's competence or lack thereof to deal with technical issues, but because the constitution (and the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure cited by the court) does not allow the judicial power of the United States to be vested in anyone other than publicly appointed judges. Appointing Lessig effectively delegated essentially judicial power to a private individual.

Rejecting the special master is also consistent with the institutional restraint argument for another reason: much as a strict enforcement of the fourth amendment limits the scope of the government's power to enforce criminal laws, refusing to allow judges to delegate complex technical questions to others limits their power to decide those questions which, arguably, they are not competent to decide (for reasons which might have nothing to do with the technical expertise of the decisionmaker).
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext