Commentary Feb 9

Commentary Feb 9 - concrete as to why there are always...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
William Lu February 9, 2009 James Tracey As seen in this chapter, rules change over time. Similar to what Prof Golan was talking about, at the first the Establishment Clause was viewed a certain way then as society perspectives change, rules are interpreted differently. There were many different proposals as to how courts should evaluate the agencies and scientists but the most durable one was the “hard look” in which at first it was “dumbed” down for judges to interpret but now it has evolved into “hard look” by other peers so it does not lack the technical aspect of it. The morality of science is never
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: concrete as to why there are always changes to how courts view it. Assuming nothing much has changed when the book was written, the “hard look” is still used in courts today but that will not last for long as different ways of looking at science will come up. The chapter was about how courts had to objectively judge the safety and science agencies with different ways but I do not see the point of mentioning this because there is always going to be conflicts whether each side is judged fairly....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online