Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Some suggest it's best to wait and see
I call bullshit.
See, John Roberts is a hack. He's only been a judge for two years. He has been a partisan Republican hack for twenty years.
The Bush administration accelerated the nomination of John Roberts in order to deflect attention from Karl Rove. Really, it makes sense. One partisan hack is taking the heat off another.
Bush was selected by the Supreme Court, and now he selects a member of his campaign team to the Supreme Court in order to draw the media's attention away from the ethics violations (and felonies, most likely) by the architect of his campaign.
Partisan hackery -- old-style, Tammany Hall patronage -- at its purest.
The Supreme Court is not a tool to help deflect attention from the crimes of those who helped (s)elect you. The Supreme Court is not a place for partisan hacks. The Bush administration however, in its continuous can-you-top-this hubris, believes it can be. In fact, it is using the Supreme Court as presidents have previously used ambassadorships. This is just today's example of how fealty is prized above all else -- more important than felonious, treasonous leaks, more important than the Constitution or the rule of law, more important than people's lives.
And so this is our fight -- country over partisanship.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Well, whaddaya know
Another white guy. From Slate:
Age: 50
Graduated from: Harvard Law School.
He clerked for: Judge Henry Friendly, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
He used to be: associate counsel to the president for Ronald Reagan, deputy solicitor general for George H.W. Bush, partner at Hogan & Hartson.
He's now: a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (appointed 2003).His confirmation battle: Roberts has been floated as a nominee who could win widespread support in the Senate. Not so likely. He hasn't been on the bench long enough for his judicial opinions to provide much ammunition for liberal opposition groups. But his record as a lawyer for the Reagan and first Bush administrations and in private practice is down-the-line conservative on key contested fronts, including abortion, separation of church and state, and environmental protection.
Civil Rights and Liberties
For a unanimous panel, denied the weak civil rights claims of a 12-year-old girl who was arrested and handcuffed in a Washington, D.C., Metro station for eating a French fry. Roberts noted that "no one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation" and that the Metro authority had changed the policy that led to her arrest. (Hedgepeth v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 2004).In private practice, wrote a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that Congress had failed to justify a Department of Transportation affirmative action program. (Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Mineta, 2001).
For Reagan, opposed a congressional effort—in the wake of the 1980 Supreme Court decision Mobile v. Bolden—to make it easier for minorities to successfully argue that their votes had been diluted under the Voting Rights Act.
Separation of Church and State
For Bush I, co-authored a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that public high-school graduation programs could include religious ceremonies. The Supreme Court disagreed by a vote of 5-4. (Lee v. Weisman, 1992)Environmental Protection and Property Rights
Voted for rehearing in a case about whether a developer had to take down a fence so that the arroyo toad could move freely through its habitat. Roberts argued that the panel was wrong to rule against the developer because the regulations on behalf of the toad, promulgated under the Endangered Species Act, overstepped the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce. At the end of his opinion, Roberts suggested that rehearing would allow the court to "consider alternative grounds" for protecting the toad that are "more consistent with Supreme Court precedent." (Rancho Viejo v. Nortion, 2003)For Bush I, argued that environmental groups concerned about mining on public lands had not proved enough about the impact of the government's actions to give them standing to sue. The Supreme Court adopted this argument. (Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation, 1990)
Criminal Law
Joined a unanimous opinion ruling that a police officer who searched the trunk of a car without saying that he was looking for evidence of a crime (the standard for constitutionality) still conducted the search legally, because there was a reasonable basis to think contraband was in the trunk, regardless of whether the officer was thinking in those terms. (U.S. v. Brown, 2004)Habeas Corpus
Joined a unanimous opinion denying the claim of a prisoner who argued that by tightening parole rules in the middle of his sentence, the government subjected him to an unconstitutional after-the-fact punishment. The panel reversed its decision after a Supreme Court ruling directly contradicted it. (Fletcher v. District of Columbia, 2004)Abortion
For Bush I, successfully helped argue that doctors and clinics receiving federal funds may not talk to patients about abortion. (Rust v. Sullivan, 1991)Judicial Philosophy
Concurring in a decision allowing President Bush to halt suits by Americans against Iraq as the country rebuilds, Roberts called for deference to the executive and for a literal reading of the relevant statute. (Acree v. Republic of Iraq, 2004)
Hearings on the nominee probably can't happen before Labor Day, which is about 30 days before the Court reconvenes on the first Monday in October.
Color me opposed.
Supreme Court speculation is intensifying
Washington was abuzz with speculation Tuesday about Judge Edith Clement of the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans ...
Known as a conservative and a strict constructionist in legal circles, Clement also has eased fears among abortion-rights advocates. She has stated that the Supreme Court "has clearly held that the right to privacy guaranteed by the Constitution includes the right to have an abortion" and that "the law is settled in that regard."
At first blush, I'm speechless.
Update: Bush will let us all know tonight (at 8 pm CDT).
Monday, July 18, 2005
Another busy week ...
Last Saturday I went across town to hear Chris Bell speak; this account of his appearance in Amarillo the same day echoes my sentiments. Tonight David Van Os spoke in my neighborhood; besides the fifty Meyerland Dems in attendance were three Houston city council candidates: Mark Lee, Herman Litt, and Ray Jones.
Tomorrow night in Bellaire, at the Campaign for a National Majority kickoff, Nick Lampson will address the group.
And this weekend a Downing Street Minutes Teach-In will be held locally. If it's anything like the Peak Oil Conference I attended a couple of weeks ago, there'll be a few hundred people there (SRO).
Find a DSM event near you this Saturday, and go.
Update: Nick Lampson will unfortunately be unable to attend the CNM event listed above; Robert Jara of the Texas Democratic Party will give an update on the prospects for the 2006 elections.
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Pretend you're Karl Rove
... the version who, in just a few short months, will be in prison.
Make a license plate (for any state, with anything you care to say on it).
Friday, July 15, 2005
Journey to the left of the blogosphere
Greg has a good wrap-up of the discussion, but the most important development was the impending kickoff of Texas Tuesdays. Go there to learn more.