Go Home

federalist

7 documents found in 0.001 seconds.

A picture named Sam

A picture named Sam 002.jpg

Trent Lott on Fox News says that Democrats are blocking judicial nominees because of racism!

Video

Lott uses Miguel Estrada's nomination as the basis for racial discrimination.

From Independent Judiciary

Judicial Temperament. A member of the Federalist Society and a board member of the arch-conservative Center for the Community Interest, Mr. Estrada is described by people who have worked with him as a conservative ideologue who is unable or unwilling to distinguish his personal views from what the law requires. That this evidence does not come in the form of law review articles, judicial opinions, or written criticism by colleagues on a state supreme court does not make it any less troubling.

Miguel Estrada is held in high regard by James Dobson from the "Focus on the Family" group and is their hopeful for the supreme court.



Antonin Scalia Is an Enemy of the State

More on Ashcroft:

Antonin Scalia Is an Enemy of the State!

So says John Ashcroft. Jeffrey Dubner reports

GET YOUR ROBES OUT OF OUR PRISONS! I just watched John Ashcroft's address to the Federalist Society. It's a gripping speech, and quite frightening. He devotes the greatest portion of it to challenging the Supreme Court's decisions in Rasul v. Bush, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, and the other "enemy combatant" cases. A taste:

...intrusive judicial oversight and second-guessing of presidential determinations in these critical areas of treaties can put at risk the very security of our nation at a time of war.

It's very much in the vein of "the ability to set aside the laws is inherent in the president." There's no transcript available just yet, and I expect there'll be analyses and critiques up by more qualified legal folks than I by the time we get back from the weekend. But I wonder how confined this constitutional theory is to Ashcroft, and whether it will in any way leave office with him. I highly doubt it.

UPDATE: Tonight's keynote speaker is, of course, Federalist Society member and Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. He's as like as not to agree with Ashcroft on this, although it's hard to be sure.

I do think that this is, in part, fallout from Bush v. Gore. Everybody knows that Scalia and company don't believe the equal protection rationale they set forward for their decision. And if what the Supremes are doing is expressing their political preferences rather than setting forth judicial principles--well, why should their will get to override Bush's and Ashcroft's? Just because Scalia, Rehnquist, and company ruled in favor of Bush in 2000 doesn't mean that Bush and company respect them for it.



Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (2515)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (4241)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Now that it's embraced its inner right-wing populist by sponsoring all those 'Tea Parties,' Fox News is going straight for the moonshine by promoting "state sovereignty" advocates who, as we mentioned yesterday, are the "Patriot" movement activists who were promoting militias in the 1990s.

Glenn Beck featured an entire hour devoted to the subject yesterday, while Neil Cavuto warmed up the subject for him by featuring a segment on the subject as well. And both of them featured people who have been heavily involved in promoting "Patriot" belief systems for years.

The most striking, of course, was Beck's hourlong "The Civilest War" program, which early on featured Beck adapting Martin Niemoller's famous "First they came" poem -- about the Nazis and the Holocaust -- to our present-day circumstances:

I think this is the problem. First they came for the banks. I wasn't a banker, I didn't really care. I didn't stand up and say anything. Then they came for the AIG executives. Then they came for the car companies. Until it gets down to you. Most people don't see -- they are coming for you at some point! You're on the list! Everybody's on the list. You may not be rich -- as currently defined.

Because, of course, bailing out failing banks and insurance companies and auto manufacturers is just like rounding up minorities and hauling them away to death camps.

As if that weren't enough bats--t crazy paranoia, much of the rest of the hour was devoted to similarly crazy talk from his participants. A Republican Utah legislator rants about "liberties and freedoms being destroyed" and the "tyranny of the federal government." Another Republican legislator, this time from Texas, talks about how Obama and the Democrats are creating "a socialist state".

Beck also calls upon a right-wing historian named Kevin Gutzman, who even his fellow right-wingers dismiss as a neo-Confederate, obsessed with a misreading of early American history that is like so many other "constitutionalist" interpretations, based on an originalism that would destroy such innovations as the abolition of slavery and women's suffrage (not to mention nearly everything else). [More on that below.]

But everything comes into sharp focus when Beck calls on Gary Marbut -- who Beck describes as the originator of the Montana gun law that inspired all these other legislators. We listen to Marbut's wisdom and absorb his advice in this show; indeed, Beck wraps up by calling on Marbut to tell us "what we've learned."

Marbut, you see, has been a fixture on the far right in Montana for many years. He's never actually been elected to any office at all, though he has run numerous times, because Montanans are all too well aware just how radical a nutcase the guy is.

Continue reading »



"ParkRidge47" Comes Out

On why he made the Vote Different ad...
(Phil) de Vellis explains that he chose to mash-up Apple's 1984 ad because he's a big fan of the company, plus he had recently re-read the book and thought that by working from their ad he'd get interest not just from political folks but also Apple fans.

He also says that he was "stunned" by all the attention the video has gotten, and that he was "basically a spectator" after he posted it and was "fascinated" to watch how it spread. He gives a nice shout-out to Adam Conner, an Obama-blogger, who posted a great examination of the video's viral course on MyDD. And we're of course tickled that he thinks this humble site has been doing a good job of analyzing what it all means.

de Vellis also gives a great defense of the tradition of anonymous political speech in America, in explaining why he didn't post the video using his real name. The Federalist Papers, he notes, were written under pseudonyms, as was Joe Klein's book Primary Colors. Even George Orwell is a pseudonym, for the writer Eric Blair. But he admits "the system worked" in eventually outing him, and he seems completely at ease with that.



Mike's Blog Round Up

Blue Gal: Jill Carroll - something we can do

FBIHOP: New report from Europe on CIA's secret prisons

We'd be worried about the stunning incompetence of our self-described War President" if Darth Cheney hadn't assured us that the Iraq insurgency was in it's “last throes."

The Revealer: New Canadian PM, Stephen Harper, is politically and religiously much further right than George W. Bush. God help 'em...
Somebody should ask Justice John Scalia why he shunned Chief Justice John Roberts' swearing-in for a Federalist Society paid junket that included a cocktail party co-hosted by Abramoff's former law partners.  Ethics, schmethics.

The Daily Howler: The NYT's fatuous Elizabeth Bumiller knows what G-Dub's readin' and what he thinks about them books.  How?  Because Scotty told her.

Somebody should ask Justice John Scalia why he shunned Chief Justice John Roberts' swearing-in for a Federalist Society paid junket that included a cocktail party co-hosted by Abramoff's former law partners. Ethics, schmethics.

The Daily Howler: The NYT's fatuous Elizabeth Bumiller knows what G-Dub's readin' and what he thinks about them books. How? Because Scotty told her.



Orrin Hatch flip-flops on questioning Roberts

Live Blogging from Supreme Court Watch:

"A second Repubican senator, Orrin Hatch of Utah (defying conventional political tie conventional wisdom in a very nice gold striped number), seems to be trying to lay the groundwork that it’s okay for Judge Roberts not to answer questions he find uncomfortable. Hatch tried to bring up a Harding nomination from years ago, citing a same-day nomination and confirmation as some kind of gold standard."

Senator Hatch himself in 1997 said:

"The Senate can and should do what it can to ascertain the jurisprudential views a nominee will bring to the bench in order to prevent the confirmation of those who are likely to be judicial activists. Determining which will become activists is not easy since many of President Clinton's nominees tend to have limited paper trails... Determining which of President Clinton's nominees will become activists is complicated and it will require the Senate to be more diligent and extensive in its questioning of nominees' jurisprudential views." (Address of Senator Hatch before University of Utah Federalist Society chapter, February 18, 1997)"



Alexander Hamilton

The Rude One gives em' a History Lesson:

Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 78 that the judiciary 'will always be the least dangerous' branch of government because it has the least capacity to 'annoy or injure' our constitutional rights." Actually, Hamilton said that it was the "least dangerous" because it can't summon the military or write laws. But knowing that would require reading past the first couple of lines of the document...read on

As always Rude...but true.

(Update): MoveLeft has more on Hamilton and Cornyn.