Whatever about Obama’s legislative record (and that is an argument for another day), the authors of this piece show that they know nothing about Law schools. They state:
Obama spent twelve years on the University of Chicago Law School faculty–singularly famous for its intellectual ferment and incubator of scholarship–and produced not even a single scholarly paper. He was President of Harvard Law Review, but wrote nothing himself.
As anyone who has spent time in academia knows, lecturers (particularly part-time ones in Law Schools) are not expected to publish any academic papers. See the current Chicago lecturers for example; most are practicing lawyers (tenure-track faculty are not and they are expected to publish). The same goes for the HLR President; the journal is a student-edited one (like all law reviews) and the president (who is usually a 2L student) is not expected (as far as I know) to publish in it. Neither of the positions would result in "a serious impact" as Katsman & Bardash claim.
Katsman has worked on several political campaigns, including Rudy Giuliani’s successful run for mayor and Bush’s 2004 re-election. He is involved with Republicans Abroad Israel (for which Bardash in co-Chairman), a group that has close ties with the RNC. They have written a whole series of anti-Obama pieces.
The JP post is really just a hatchet job by a pair of Republican operators. Whatever about Obama’s legislative record, this part of Katsman & Bardash’s argument is clearly wrong.