The Death of Contra
James Ming Chen
Michigan State University - College of Law
University of Louisville - Louis D. Brandeis School of Law
Stanford Law Review, Vol. 52, p. 889, 2000
Lemon isn't dead, but contra is. Once upon a time, truth was truth, and we had a way to signal what wasn't. Until 1996, the Bluebook directed lawyers to use contra when cited authority directly states the contrary of the proposition. The 16th edition of the Bluebook removed contra from the list of valid introductory signals.
The death of contra is the latest, surest sign of decadence and decline in American legal culture. It symbolizes the subtle subversion of law and legal scholarship. Where once clarity ruled, negation now lacks legal voice.
Poor contra! A legal culture that neither knows contra and nor respects its power is one in which the Supreme Court can spurn a condemned man's habeas petition because the Court had used cf. instead of see in another man's case. Lambrix v. Singletary, 520 U.S. 518 (1997).
O contra, now sent to Heaven, cursed by your fate. Accord, remain; you will be used, in courts as in the law reviews. Give us a way to signal lies, and forgive our omitted parentheticals, as we forgive those who force us to write parentheticals. And mock us not with citations, but deliver us from pedants. For in Hell there will be nothing but law, and the Bluebook will be meticulously observed.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 6
Keywords: contra, citations, Bluebook, Harvard, Lambrix, accord, post-modernism, law reviews, legal writing, humor, satireAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: September 27, 2006
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.281 seconds