15 J. Pub. L. 230 (1966)
IN A SYMPOSIUM held at the Notre Dame Law School on February 29, 1964, on several constitutional amendments designed to limit the power of the Supreme Court, Professor Philip B. Kurland of the University of Chicago Law School read a terse and delightfully witty paper in which he compared the Supreme Court to Caesar, sieged on the one side by the modem forces of Brutus, and championed on the other side by the contemporary Mark Antonys. There was no doubt in Professor Kurland's mind that the efforts of conspirators like the Council of State Governments, not to mention its less respectable co-conspirators like the John Birch Society, to circumscribe the Court's power and thus slay Caesar are going wide of the mark. But he was convinced that the defenses of Antony are equally harmful to Caesar. The irony is that while the indictment of Brutus against Caesar mounts with each successive Term of Court, Antony's apologies could actually push Caesar over the precipice into the pit of destruction. For if Caesar is to survive his enemies as well as his friends he might well be advised to look into his own soul and in a spirit of self-abnegation purge himself of whatever villainy he sees there.
Donald P. Kommers,
Professor Kurland, the Supreme Court and Political Science,
15 J. Pub. L. 230 (1966).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1374