Professor Blackmon, is that consistent with the constitutions designed for judicial relief? No, it is not. Or is that, rather a recipe for nationwide paralysis based on a single courtroom? Yes. Would you also agree that The proper constitutional remedy is to address the plaintiff's actual injury, not to give one judge the power to halt activity unrelated to the case at hand. Article three requires that. And how does Article three require that? Article three speaks of cases and controversies that specific people have. Specific. You cannot grant relief to broadcasts doing a certain injury before the court. (02:32–02:43)
CLAIM
Asserts that constitutional remedies should address specific injuries, not grant broad powers to judges.
This is an excerpt from a raw transcript. The assertions have not been audited or verified. Tap the video to view the source footage and understand the context.
