tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post5072057204895876317..comments2023-10-24T11:23:31.580-04:00Comments on Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: I Am Not The Only One Praying For ThisWilliam A. Jacobsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16433685588536441422noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-64804665150956983892010-05-11T14:15:42.790-04:002010-05-11T14:15:42.790-04:00Bonus question: At least in the sense of some mode...<b>Bonus question:</b> At least in the sense of some modern notions of court conservatism, I would have to say Felix Frankfurter, who was appointed by Franklin Roosevelt back in 1938.<br /><br />He was, incidentally, the first nominee to be a Justice of the Supreme Court who personally put in an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee. <br /><br />Particularly given his background -- e.g., having been personally identified with radicalism for having performing work on behalf of socialists and other minorities, and also for having written a book critical of the prosecution and the judge for the conduct of the trial of accused anarchists Sacco & Vanzetti -- his views, once he was on the Court, were nevertheless marked by an hesitancy to attack "social problems" through judicial activism. <br /><br />Because of his frequently articulated philosophy of <i>judicial restraint</i> as a Justice -- or favoring judicial limits on the exercise of their power -- Frankfurter's tenure on the court can be seen as having run at least somewhat firmly against the tide of judicial activism that marked the mid-twentieth century, during his tenure and thereafter. He also consistently viewed state power as being owed more deference that the majority of the Court frequently did.Trochilushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07661310034696479920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-72746557140379142902010-05-11T13:15:12.996-04:002010-05-11T13:15:12.996-04:00When was the last time a Democrat president appoin...When was the last time a Democrat president appointed a swing vote? How about, um, "Never?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-39345405071558506632010-05-11T12:03:57.948-04:002010-05-11T12:03:57.948-04:00Byron White.Byron White.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09163410983187179677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-53567527726438626252010-05-11T10:33:55.206-04:002010-05-11T10:33:55.206-04:00Liberals or Leftists who wish for a liberal equiva...Liberals or Leftists who wish for a liberal equivalent of Antonin Scalia are deluded, in the sense that such a person would, to fulfill the parallelism, have to love America and the law but from the "other perspective." Instead, what modern liberals (leftists) really want is someone who hates America, is contemptuous of the Constitution, and would be willing to corrupt the law with the same alleged abandon they falsely impute to Scalia.rrpjrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17415013508149477243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-44220063559801391332010-05-11T10:01:33.438-04:002010-05-11T10:01:33.438-04:00"The selection of Solicitor General Elena Kag..."The selection of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to be the nation’s 112th justice extends a quarter-century pattern in which Republican presidents generally install strong conservatives on the Supreme Court while Democratic presidents pick candidates who often disappoint their liberal base."<br /><br />Really? On what planet? Here on Earth, GOP presidents have been woefully and notoriously UNsuccessful in appointing strong conservatives to the Court. Even limiting the time frame to 25 years, we have the examples of Anthony Kennedy and David Souter. Before that, there were John Paul Stevens and Sandra O'Connor. Granted, Reagan and the Bushes did manage to install four solid conservatives during the last 25 years, but to suggest the court is strongly conservative today due to the Republicans' ruthless efficiency in making ideological picks is nonsense.<br /><br />The answer to the question, BTW, is Whizzer White.<br /><br />As for why there is no liberal Scalia, it's because of Bork. The Dems set the precedent with Bork's nomination that any outspoken ideologue can be defeated as an extremist. Now, the trick is finding people who are just as dogmatically liberal or conservative (as the case may be), but who are affable, meek, and lacking a paper trail. Scalia is the last "Scalia" we'll see for a long time.Conrad Bibbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05422935506611755825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-71852699955411234982010-05-11T09:38:02.894-04:002010-05-11T09:38:02.894-04:00There is not counter to Scalia, and never will be ...There is not counter to Scalia, and never will be because liberal philosophy cannot competeRalphhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06320105485736052679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-86537571336372552742010-05-11T09:18:39.387-04:002010-05-11T09:18:39.387-04:00I know liberals get mad about Scalia. I have frien...I know liberals get mad about Scalia. I have friend who hates Scalia with either bone in his body but can't explain why.<br /><br />I have always taken in part why of the reason why the liberal judges are so unexceptional is it to unexceptional to be liberal lawyer. To be conservative in a Law school like William Jacobson or to make stands like what Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito. All took before joining the court makes you stand apart from the crowd and defend your values in meaningful way. <br /><br />A ways which a liberal lawyer don't have too over the course of their lives. This constant argument forges a stronger person. That is not to say their aren't strong liberal thinkers, but they are much less likely to stand above the crowd and be counted than there conservative counterparts.Sayomarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09461828645499767013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-59969925192754245272010-05-11T09:03:22.131-04:002010-05-11T09:03:22.131-04:00Answer to bonus question?
Never.
That was way to...Answer to bonus question?<br /><br />Never.<br /><br />That was way too easy.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13316633198463498761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-2744248938525847272010-05-11T08:42:38.131-04:002010-05-11T08:42:38.131-04:00Who would be Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Already stated h...Who would be Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Already stated how I feel about this appointment in another post here. I'm thinking outside the box and fingers crossed she could will be valuable on future issues. All these idiots (politicians and lefty critics) can't see the crazy train coming down the track.Theresahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07956024937374267943noreply@blogger.com