My first question (as a retired lawyer) is why this report was issued under the auspices of the Law School rather than the Yale Medical School. That fact alone imbues the report with a patina of politization and makes it suspect from the jump.
My first question (as a retired lawyer) is why this report was issued under the auspices of the Law School rather than the Yale Medical School. That fact alone imbues the report with a patina of politization and makes it suspect from the jump.
I think this type of institute is actually to provide public argumentation for or against certain positions. Lawyers are quite well positioned to provide reasonable sounding arguments, especially when it doesn't have to be 2 way.
My first question (as a retired lawyer) is why this report was issued under the auspices of the Law School rather than the Yale Medical School. That fact alone imbues the report with a patina of politization and makes it suspect from the jump.
Yes this was referred to again and again in the comments of the Lydia Polgreen Times piece. I'd be interested to know as well.
I think this type of institute is actually to provide public argumentation for or against certain positions. Lawyers are quite well positioned to provide reasonable sounding arguments, especially when it doesn't have to be 2 way.
My guess (and this is just a guess) is it might have something to do with the reports theoretical impacts on policy.