Twitter

BlogAds

Recent Comments

Label Cloud

Pay no attention to the people behind the curtain

Showing posts with label United States Supreme Court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States Supreme Court. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 09, 2010

J. Beauregard disregards facts in Kagan-military op-ed

by folkbum

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, taking space oft reserved for Patrick McIlheran--and borrowing heavily from McIlheran's playbook of false implications and innuendo--trots out the shouldn't-it-be-debunked-enough-by-now story of Elena Kagan and the military recruiters.

After Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court, conservative opponents seized upon and distorted a story from her tenure as Dean of the Harvard Law School as a cudgel against her. Problem is that, undistorted, the story not only doesn't support the conservative line--"Kagan kicked military recruiters off campus!"--but actively undermines their argument that she might be anti-military.

Robert C. Clark, Kagan's immediate predecessor at Harvard Law, took to the pages of the conservative Wall Street Journal earlier this spring to lay the story to rest. There was apparently one semester under Kagan's tenure when the military recruited in a different location than the school's Office of Career Services, but at no time were they barred from campus or prohibited from recruiting Harvard Law graduates. Had Sessions done even cursory research, he would have known better than to accuse Kagan of "actively obstructing the military."

But that's not all!

NPR's Nina Totenberg went beyond Clark's clear defense, and actually interviewed people involved in the controversy during that one semester. Totenberg recounts how, upon deciding that the military wouldn't be able to use the OCS, Kagan actively sought other ways for the military to recruit:
But while her public position as dean was to revert to the anti-discrimination policy, Kagan reached out privately to the Student Veterans Association, asking the members, some of them Iraq War veterans, to once again act as a proxy for the placement office. [. . .]

If the student vets had turned her down flat, Kagan had a backup plan for a faculty member to act as the facilitator.

[Current Harvard Law Dean Ellen] Cosgrove says Kagan's reasons were twofold. First, she "wanted to figure out a way to support the military by sending them some of the best and brightest young lawyers that would be graduating from Harvard," and secondly, she wanted to "support students who had an interest in a military career."

Kagan apparently succeeded because the numbers of students who signed up with the military remained constant while she was dean. In fact, they even occasionally increased.
No one ever said that Jeff Sessions was the cream of the crop on the Senate Judiciary Committee. (Indeed, you see a lot of the opposite.) But this is beyond even his level of pale. It's pretty clear that Sessions has no use for facts or reality.

What's sadder is that the Journal Sentinel ran the op-ed anyway.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

A Souter-able Conundrum

by folkbum

Let's all remember that not too long ago Republicans were telling us that filibustering Supreme Court nominees was akin to treason or something.

Thursday, June 26, 2008

What I learned from Wisconsin's conservatives this week*

by folkbum

When the Supreme Court of the United States overturns a state law duly enacted by the legislature of that state, it is an activist court making a bad decision by overturning the will of the people. Alternatively, when the Supreme Court of the United States overturns a state law duly enacted by the legislature of that state**, it has done a great service for the Constitution and our freedoms.

Also, when Supreme Court of the United States overturns a law duly enacted by the Congress of the United States, it is an activist court making a bad decision by overturning the will of the people. Alternatively, when Supreme Court of the United States overturns a law duly enacted by the Congress of the United States, it has done a great service for the Constitution and our freedoms.

* I went with this format since I figured "Heller High Water" was already taken by someone, somewhere. Also note that my wry irony about Scalia's "[i]t will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed" rationale made the front page of Daily Kos, but some other guy got the credit, though I clearly beat him to the punch.

** For purposes of this post, we'll consider Washington, DC, a state, since the principle is the same.

Will SCOTUS Say This Is OK?

by capper

Many on the right side of the blogoshpere are eagerly anticipating the much expected ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States regarding a gun ban in Washington, D.C.

Given the recent rulings of this court, I personally don't have much hope for common sense to prevail. But I do find it ironic that on the day the right might be celebrating the re-affirmation that they can carry their precious handguns (in D.C. anyway), there are many people in Kentucky that will be mourning their loved ones killed by someone taking advantage of a similar law. And make no mistake, the killer's access to a gun was approved. From the article (emphasis mine):
Nevels said family members told detectives that Higdon kept a .45-caliber pistol in his car almost all the time, which is permissible in Kentucky.

I can't imagine how someone could defend this, as the reason for the murdering rampage was that he had to wear safety goggles and not talk on his cell phone while working-common rules in most factories.

I'm just waiting for similar stories to come out of Florida as well.