DOCSLIB.ORG

A Letter from the PUBLISHER Alem, Stefan Kanter, Ray Kennedy, John Koffend, Ed Mag- Nuson, Lance Morrow, John M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Letter from the PUBLISHER Alem, Stefan Kanter, Ray Kennedy, John Koffend, Ed Mag- Nuson, Lance Morrow, John M TIMETHE WEEKLY NEWSreACAZINe _ Barron HADDEN 1898-1925 irouNDs--; Hadar Sr.. Luca ig98--1967 Korroa-tai-Cater Hamer Dosrovsff CRAIRmAN or ran BOARD ANDREW H siseatt. Pads:Dna Jamas R. SHEPLEY CHAIRMAN Idtacorren Cosoncran James A. Loots Samoa STAFF Emir* Daman. Smut:Hsu VtCE Caddstaucts Roy E. Liaising MANAGING EDITOR Henry Anatole Grunwald ASSISTANT MANAGING EDITORS Edward I.. Jamieson, Richard M. Seamon SENIOR EDITORS A. T. Baker,LeszbI. Barrett, George G. Daniels, Michael DeManta. John nontan, Timothy Foote, Leon Jere. Ronald P. Krim. Maraludi Bird Martin. Jason Medusas, 11.4bart =neyerson. ART DIRECTOR SIDEY, FISCHER, MacNEIL, STACKS, AUSTIN, FENTRESS, GOODPASTER Louis R. Glesamann ASSOCIATE EDITORS Douglas Auchindosa, Harriet Bachman, Gurney Breckenfeld, Clell Bryant, Richard Burghelm, Gilbert Cant. Gerald Clarke. er Davidson. Philip Herrera, Keith R. Johnson. T. H. A letter from the PUBLISHER alem, Stefan Kanter, Ray Kennedy, John Koffend, Ed Mag- nuson, Lance Morrow, John M. Scott, David B. Tinnin, Edwin G. Warner. CONTRIBUTING EDITORS William E. Barnes, William Bender. Patricia Blake, Edwin Bol- well. Ruth Brine. Marshall Burchard, George J. Church. Jay Cocks, Christopher T. Cary. Harold B. Crowther Jr., Johanna Davis, Charles Derer-skey, George Dickerson, William R. Downer. L. Clayton Do Bois, Martha M. Duffy, Jose M. Ferrer III. Frederic Golden, Mark S. Goodman, James Grant, Robert G. Hummeretone, Geoffrey James. Timothy M. James, Marguerite Johnson Katie Kelly, Alwyn Lee. Bob McCabe, Mayo Moho. Mark Nichols, James Randall, R. Z. Sheppard, William E. Smith, ORE than in any other of our News Editor Edwin Goodpaster re- Larry Still, Peter Stoler. Gene Thornton, Mark Visbniak. Carey M Winfrey. domestic news bureaus, each of layed instructions and guidance on RESEARCHERS TIME'S 20 Washington correspon- the needs of the editors. And Hugh Marylois P. Vet. (Chief), Leah Shanks Gordon. Lu Anne Aulepp, Nancy MCD. Chase, Marla Luisa Cisneros, Mary Fernandez, dents is responsible for his own spe- Sidey, Washington bureau chief since Marta A. Fitzgerald, Dorothy HaYstend, Joy Homffce. Amelia North. cial news beat: Week in and week January 1969 and our chief President VirginiaAdsune, Susan Altchek, Margaret Bach, Priscilla B. Badger. Claire Barnett, Patricia Heckert, Jean Bergerud, Madeleine Berry. out, they keep watch on the man in watcher since 1960, assumed the ba- Margaret G. Boeth, Dorothea Bourne Molly Bowditch, Anne Constable. Kathleen Coon, Rosamond Draper. Rosemary L. the White House, the men on the ton of overall command. Frank, Joanne Fenger. Mane Gibbons, Patricia Gordn. Georgia Harbison, Harriet Heck, Nancy L. Jalet. Mary Kelley, Geraldine Hill, and on all the personalities and By the time the typewriters began Kirshenbaum, Marion Knox., Vera Kovarsky. Nina W. Ulm, machinery of government and pol- Gail Lowman, Amanda Macintosh, Gaye Mcinteah, Gillian pounding in New York, the editors MeManua, Clare Mead, Sara C. Medina, Alexandra Messy, Ingrid itics. Sometimes their stories stand had 35 different reports from which K. Michaelis, Marguerite Michaels. Deborah Murphy Ursula Nadaady, Nancy Newman. Hilary °Were, S. Marion Pfkul, Sue alone. Yet often in the immensely to work. Edited by Senior Editor Raffety. Wendy Raymont, Erika K. Winches, Eileen Shield,. Raissa Silverman, Michele Stephenson. Betty Suyker, Anne Tan. complex world of government, an Laurence Barrett, the story fell into Mary Themo. Lois Timaick„ Stephanie Trimble, F. Sydnor Van- derachmidt. Susanne S. Washburn. Michele Whitney. Nancy event calls for many of the virtu- three parts. The cover on President Williams. Linda Young, Rosemarie T. Zadikov. PICTURE AND PRODUCTION EDITORS osos to come together as an orches- Nixon and the vote's significance for Charles P. Jackson (Chief); John M. Cavanagh. Eugene F. Coyle trated whole. Such a case is this his embattled Administration was (Deputies). Prortrags: Alton L. Clinger'. Alan Washburn. David P. Wyiand. Coto& Diasc-roa: Arnold H. brapkln. COLOR PROJECT week's cover story on President Nix- written by Associate Editor Ed Mag- Maverick: Andrea Svedberg. Pacmucnom: Burior Nargolwala, Erwin S. Edelman, Manuel Delgado, Agustin Lamboy, Austin on, pegged to the Senate's rejection nuson and researched by Deborah Meme, Stanley Redfern. Pic-ruaz Raztesactoras: Greta Davis, Mary Dunn, Alice Rose George. Evelyn Merrin. Francine Mlles, of Supreme Court nominee Judge Murphy. The box on the lives and ca- Deborah Pierce. Ursula Robbina, Carol Saner, Nancy L. Smith, Elizabeth Seeder, Tina Tinay. G. Harrold Carswell. reers of Judge Carswell and the other ASSISTANT ART DIRECTOR: Arturo Casenenve. When the news broke on Wednes- rejected nominee, Clement Hayns- CORRESPONDENTS Time-Life New Swells. day, the correspondents were already worth, was written by Contributing Murray J. Gut (Chief) R. Edward Jackson, Robert Parker (Deputlaff deep into their reporting. Simmons Editor Peter Stoler. The second box Senior Correspondent: jeho L. Steele. Washington: Hugh Sidey„ Edwin W. Goodpaster. Bonnie Angelo. Fentress was at the White House to on the Senators at the center of this ohn J. Austin. Walter Bennett, Martha Bucknell, Vincent A. Jarlin Jr., Jess Cook jr,. Simmons Fentress. Dean H. Fischer, gauge the presidential reaction and historic confrontation was written by Hays Gorey Terry Handful., Paul R. Hathaway, Nell MacNeil, Lawrence Malkin. John M ulliken. Herman Nickel, John F. Stacks, future course. Neil MacNeil, chief Associate Editor Keith Johnson. Both Mark SullivanArthur White, Marvin H Chicago: Champ Clark. Joseph Si. Boyce, Samuel K. neer. Frank B. Merrick, Jacob congressional correspondent, was were researched by Genevieve Wil- Simms, Robot Wlldau. Les Angeles: Donald Neff, Sandra Bur. busy interviewing Kentucky's Mar- ton, Donn E. Downine. Jonathan Z. Larsen, Martin Sullivan. son. Says Sidey: "This was an old- David A. Whiting.John L. Wilhelm. New York: Frank Mc- low Cook and other crucial Senators. fashioned power conflict between Hill Culloch, Abu" H. Anderson Jr.. Roger Beardwood, Mary Cronin. Douglas Gagner, Ted Hall, Jill Krementz, Leonard Levitt. John Austin, who covers Congress and White House—the classic Wash- Richard N. Ostling, Karsten Prager, Rudolph S. Rauch 111, James F. Simon. Sandy Smith. Atlanta: JosephKane,). Kenneth with MacNeil, focused his reporting ington struggle. It had emotion, elev- Danforth. Peter Range. Hasten: Gregory H. Wi erzynekl, Barry Hillenbrand. Robert Lewis, Ruth Mel:glens Galvin. Detroit: on Indiana's Birch Bayh, leader of enth-hour suspense, marvelous char- Peter Vanderwicken, David Skedgell. Houston: Leo Janos. David DeVoss. San Fra nelson lease L. Birnbaum, Gisela Holm. the Carswell opposition. Dean Fisch- acters like Martha Mitchell, and a William F. Marmon Jr. United Nations: Frederick Gruin. I. Curtis Prendergast. Lansing Lamont, Honor Balfour. er, the bureau's legal expert, was in whole stageful of bit players. In the Patricia Delaney. Charles R. Eisendrath, Christopher Porterfield Pods: William Rade:stackers, Roland Flamini, Horace Judson, the Justice Department interviewing end, with the application of shoe Paul Rens. Bonn: Benjamin W. Cate, George 'Taber. Common Market: Robert Ball. Rome: James Bell.John Shaw, Wilton one of Attorney General John Mitch- leather and hard sense, the story al- Wynn. Jerusalem': Marlin Levin. Eastern Europa/ 8. William Mader. Beirut: Gavin Scott. Mediterranean: Lee Griggs. ell's key aides. John Stacks was soon most reported itself." Meson.; Jerrold L Schecter. Stanley W. Cloud. Far East: probing Senate attitudes toward the Louie Kraur (Singapore). Hong Kenn Bruce W. Nelan. Saigon: Mani: Clerk, Robert S. Anson, Burton Pine., James Wiliwerth. nomination of another Southerner The Cover: Portrait in watercolor Bangkok: Hugh S. Greenway. East Myles: John West Africa: James Wilde. New Delhi: Dan COegin, James to the Supreme Court. Throughout, and tempera by Bob Peak. Shepherd. Tokyo: Edwin M. Reingold, S. Chang. Frank Iwama. Sydney: Ernest Shirley. Ottawa: Richard L. Duncan. Toronto: Peter Simms, Robertson Cochrane. Montreal: William Fried- man. Calgary: Ed Ogle. South America: David C. Lee (Buenos Aired; Me Garcia. Kay Huff (Rio de Janeiro). Mulct' City: Ber- nard Diederich. News Desks: Rosemary Byrnes, Marcia Gauger. Cable Desk: Minnie Magazine. Ad ministration: Lawrence M. INDEX Crutcher. EDITORIAL SERVICES Cover Story 8 Color Obituary 38 Paul Welch (Director). Robert W. Boyd Jr.. Peter Drag,Margaret 69 T. Fischer, George Karam. Doris O'Neil, Frederick L. Redpath PUBUSHER Art 54 Medicine 46 Religion 58 Henry Luce Ill Books ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER Ralph P. Davidson 92 Milestones 77 Science • .52 GENERAL MANAGER Kelm Sutton CracuLarlow DIRECTOR. Robert J. Moore Business 81 Modern Living 68 Show Business . .72 Pao:donoN DIRRCTOR Richard E. Coffey PRODUCTION DIRECTOR. Donald J. Barr Cinema 90 Music 57 Sport 60 ADVERTISING SALES DIRECTOR John A. Meyer Education 44 Nation 8 Theater 51 ASSOCIATE Satan DIRECTOR Robert C. Barr Q 1970 Tam inc. All rights reaerved, Principal office: Rockefeller Letters 2 People 36 World ....22 Center. New York, New York 10(120. Press 43 TIMETHE WEEKLY NEWSMAGAZINE April 20, 1970 Vol. 95, No. 16 THE NATION an LSD-laced sugar cube from the fam- BIRCH BAYH AMERICAN NOTES ily refrigerator, the suicide of Art Link- Physician, Heal Thyself letter's daughter Diane, 20, after a bad Juvenile delinquents are easy to iden- trip. Now a new chapter has been writ- tify once they have gone astray, but spot- ten in the grim
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Law and Lawyers: the Road to Reform Kenneth W
    Fordham Law Review Volume 63 | Issue 4 Article 3 1995 Law and Lawyers: The Road To Reform Kenneth W. Starr Recommended Citation Kenneth W. Starr, Law and Lawyers: The Road To Reform, 63 Fordham L. Rev. 959 (1995). Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol63/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized administrator of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LAW AND LAWYERS: THE ROAD TO REFORM KENNETH W. STARR* M Y reflections this evening, which focus on our nation's justice system, reflect broader social concerns, going to the basic struc- ture of American institutions and the precipitous decline in trust re- posed in those institutions. Let me not mince words. As a people, Americans have become highly distrustful and disrespectful of institutions, ranging from the basic social unit of the traditional nuclear family to churches and syna- gogues, schools and universities, and in this election season, of govern- ment itself. Courts-the justice system-are no exception to this powerful trend. In my view, the trend is broad-based and deep enough to be profoundly disturbing. What explains this trend of distrust and disrespect? Part of the an- swer, I believe, lies in America's inherent, culturally rooted suspicion of power. We are, at bottom, an anti-power society. We are a revolu- tionary society.
    [Show full text]
  • DISQUALIFICATION of JUDGES: in SUPPORT of the BAYH BILL Jomi P
    DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGES: IN SUPPORT OF THE BAYH BILL Jomi P. FRANK*t The defeat of Judge Clement Haynsworth, Jr., for the Supreme Court demonstrates that the federal law of disqualification of judges needs to be rewritten. As Justice Blackmun said of a shift in his own personal disqualification practice, "The times have changed."1 John Marshall heard Marbury v. Madison although the substance of the case involved problems arising from his own failure to deliver papers when he was Secre- tary of State in the Madison administration. Justices Byron White and Thurgood Marshall, former Deputy Attorney General and Solicitor General, never hear cases involving matters with which they dealt in the Department of Justice. The difference is not in the character of the Justices, but in the governing law and the changed attitudes of recent times. In Marshall's day, the law of disqualifica- tion was governed by two maxims from the sages. Coke, in the most famous rubric of the law of disqualification, had said, "aliquis non debet esse judex in propria causa," or no man shall be a judge in his own case Blackstone had reduced this to a straight matter of pocketbook interest by excluding the possibility of disqualifica- tion for bias or prejudice or relationship, "for the law will not suppose the possi- bility of bias or favor in a judge."' * (Mr. Frank, author of numerous books on the United States Supreme Court, is presently in private practice in Phoenix, Arizona Ed.) t I have been assisted in this article by Mr. John McLamb, a student at Yale Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 110 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 110 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 154 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 No. 152 Senate (Legislative day of Wednesday, September 17, 2008) The Senate met at 9:30 a.m., on the U.S. SENATE, Treasury and the Chairman of the Fed expiration of the recess, and was called PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE, will be over in the House around 2 to order by the Honorable BENJAMIN L. Washington, DC, September 24, 2008. o’clock this afternoon. Democrats are To the Senate: CARDIN, a Senator from the State of holding a caucus at 4:30 p.m. to talk Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, Maryland. of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby about this issue. The Secretary is com- appoint the Honorable BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, ing to that caucus at 5 o’clock. PRAYER a Senator from the State of Maryland, to I hope we can make more progress. The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- perform the duties of the Chair. We have not only the Jewish holidays fered the following prayer: ROBERT C. BYRD, coming up next week, but a very im- Let us pray. President pro tempore. portant event is this Friday. I was told Gracious, loving God, let Your light, Mr. CARDIN thereupon assumed the and heard on the radio this morning Your wisdom, Your righteousness, and chair as Acting President pro tempore. that as much as 85 percent of the Your love fill our minds and hearts f American people will watch the debate this Friday.
    [Show full text]
  • The Clan Macneil
    THE CLAN MACNEIL CLANN NIALL OF SCOTLAND By THE MACNEIL OF BARRA Chief of the Clan Fellow of the Society of .Antiquarie1 of Scotland With an Introduction by THE DUKE OF ARGYLL Chief of Clan Campbell New York THE CALEDONIAN PUBLISHING COMPANY MCMXXIII Copyright, 1923, by THE CALEDONIAN PUBLISHING COMPANY Entered at Stationers~ Hall, London, England .All rights reser:ved Printed by The Chauncey Holt Compan}'. New York, U. 5. A. From Painting by Dr. E, F. Coriu, Paris K.1s11\1 UL CASTLE} IsLE OF BAH HA PREFACE AVING a Highlander's pride of race, it was perhaps natural that I should have been deeply H interested, as a lad, in the stirring tales and quaint legends of our ancient Clan. With maturity came the desire for dependable records of its history, and I was disappointed at finding only incomplete accounts, here and there in published works, which were at the same time often contradictory. My succession to the Chiefship, besides bringing greetings from clansmen in many lands, also brought forth their expressions of the opinion that a complete history would be most desirable, coupled with the sug­ gestion that, as I had considerable data on hand, I com­ pile it. I felt some diffidence in undertaking to write about my own family, but, believing that under these conditions it would serve a worthy purpose, I commenced this work which was interrupted by the chaos of the Great War and by my own military service. In all cases where the original sources of information exist I have consulted them, so that I believe the book is quite accurate.
    [Show full text]
  • The House Committee on Ways and Means
    This dissertation has been 65-13,211 microfilmed exactly as received CATALDO, Everett Felix, 1935- THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1965 Political Science, general University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University Everett F. Cataldo, B.A., M.A. ****** The Ohio State University 1965 Approved by Adyz.ser u Department orPolitical Science VTTA October 5? 1935 Born - Franklin, Massachusetts 1957.......... B.A., College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, Massachusetts 1959.......... M.A., Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts I96O- 6 2....... Teaching Assistant, Department of Political Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1 9 6 2 -6 3....... Congressional Fellow of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D. C. 1 9 6 3 -6 5....... Visiting Lecturer, Department of Political Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Political Science American Government and Politics. Professors Harvey C. Mansfield and Myron Q. Hale Parties, Politics, and Political Processes. Professors Allen E. Helms, Lawrence J. R. Herson, and James B. Christoph Political Theory. Professor David Spitz Comparative Government. Professors Harold Zink and James B. Christoph TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES............ v INTRODUCTION....................................... 1 Chapter I. THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS: STRUCTUAL PROPERTIES..................... 12 Committee Organization Recruitment of Committee Members Summary and Conclusion II. PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES OF WAYS AND MEANS MEMBERS................... 51 Summary and Conclusions III. GENESIS OF THE TAX PROGRAM................
    [Show full text]
  • Talk Show Transcripts - Republicans (1)” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 40, folder “Talk Show Transcripts - Republicans (1)” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Ron Nessen donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to these materials. Digitized from Box 40 of The Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library CBS NEWS 2020 M Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 FACE THE NATION as broadcast over the CBS Television Network and the CBS Radio Network Sunday, June 6, 1976 -- 11:30 AM - 12:00 Noon, EDT Origination: Washington, D. C. GUEST: GERALD R. FORD President of the United States REPORTERS: George Herman, CBS News Helen Thomas, United Press International Bob Schieffer, CBS News Producer: Mary 0. Yates Associate Producer: Joan Barone EDITORS: All copyright and right to copyright in this transcript and in the broadcast are owned by CBS.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Law V8n1 2018-8-1
    INTRODUCTION “THE CIRCUIT JUSTICE IS A VERY IMPORTANT PERSON” DID IN-CHAMBERS CONCERNS HELP DERAIL A SUPREME COURT NOMINEE’S CONFIRMATION? Ira Brad Matetsky† his Journal of In-Chambers Practice focuses on opinions and orders that Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States issue in their individual capacity, or “in chambers.” It has now been four Tyears since any Justice issued an in-chambers opinion,1 although the Court’s recent per curiam opinion in Benisek v. Lamone2 cited not one but two of them. The fact that a Justice can act on certain matters individually, rather than as one-ninth of the Court as a whole, ordinarily receives little atten- tion outside the Court, some of its Bar, and readers of its Journal. In at least one instance, however, the significance of the Justices’ in-chambers authority was used strategically, as part of an ultimately successful effort to defeat a nomination to the Supreme Court. In 1969, Justice Abe Fortas resigned. To succeed him, President Rich- ard Nixon nominated Clement Haynsworth, a Judge of the U.S. Court of † Partner, Ganfer Shore Leeds & Zauderer, LLP, New York, N.Y. 1 The Justices’ four most recent in-chambers opinions, issued between 2011 and 2014, are reprint- ed in the Rapp’s Reports section of this issue. 2 138 S.Ct. 1942 (2018) (citing Lucas v. Townsend, 486 U.S. 1301, 3 Rapp 1284 (1988) (Kennedy, J., in chambers); Fishman v. Schaffer, 429 U.S. 1325, 2 Rapp 721 (1976) (Marshall, J. in cham- bers)). See Tony Mauro, In-Chambers Supreme Court Opinions Get Rare Nod in Gerrymandering Ruling, https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2018/06/20/in-chambers-supreme-court-opinions-get- rare-nod-in-gerrymandering-ruling (June 20, 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • Public Opinion on the Supreme Court
    AEI Public Opinion S Studies PUBLIC OPINION ON THE SUPREME COURT (Updated June 2012) Compiled by Karlyn H. Bowman, Senior Fellow and Andrew Rugg, Research Assistant 1 Table of Contents TRENDS IN CONFIDENCE IN THE COURT .................................................................................. 4 APPROVAL ........................................................................................................................................... 9 FAVORABILITY ................................................................................................................................. 12 THE COURT’S POWER AND BALANCE TODAY ......................................................................... 13 THE IDEOLOGY OF THE NEXT JUSTICE, NEW COURT.......................................................... 17 What Americans Wanted of Obama’s Nominees ......................................................................... 17 What Americans Wanted of George W. Bush’s Nominees ......................................................... 18 THE PRESIDENT’S DECISION OR THE SENATE’S?................................................................. 21 THE NEXT NOMINEE: LEGAL BACKGROUND AND OTHER ISSUES ................................... 24 Views and Qualifications of the Nominee ................................................................................... 24 Roberts’s views on Abortion ........................................................................................................ 27 Bush’s Nominees and Abortion ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Character, Competency, and Constitutionalism: Did the Bork Nomination Represent a Fundamental Shift in Onfirc Mation Criteria? Frank Guliuzza III
    Marquette Law Review Volume 75 Article 5 Issue 2 Winter 1992 Character, Competency, and Constitutionalism: Did the Bork Nomination Represent a Fundamental Shift in onfirC mation Criteria? Frank Guliuzza III Daniel J. Reagan David M. Barrett Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Frank Guliuzza III, Daniel J. Reagan, and David M. Barrett, Character, Competency, and Constitutionalism: Did the Bork Nomination Represent a Fundamental Shift ni Confirmation Criteria?, 75 Marq. L. Rev. 409 (1992). Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol75/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marquette Law Review by an authorized administrator of Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHARACTER, COMPETENCY, AND CONSTITUTIONALISM: DID THE BORK NOMINATION REPRESENT A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT IN CONFIRMATION CRITERIA? BY FRANK GULIUZZA III,* DANIEL J. REAGAN,** DAVID M. BARRETr*** I. INTRODUCTION Some constitutional scholars contend that with the reelection of Ronald Reagan, and his political opponent's perception that he was in a solid posi- tion to fashion the Supreme Court in his own image, the nomination and confirmation process for nominees to the Supreme Court experienced a fun- damental transformation. These commentators argue that the Senate has altered the criteria by which it judges nominees to the Court, shifting its focus from nominees' personal character and professional competency to an emphasis upon their social and judicial philosophy-their "constitutional- ism." This shift from character and competency questions to constitution- alism concerns was most evident in the nomination, and the Senate's subsequent rejection, of Judge Robert Bork in 1987.1 Others disagree and claim that there has been no shift in confirmation criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • The Confirmation Process and the Quality of Political Debate
    Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons Faculty Publications 1993 The Confirmation Process and the Quality of Political Debate Jonathan L. Entin Case Western University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/faculty_publications Part of the President/Executive Department Commons Repository Citation Entin, Jonathan L., "The Confirmation Process and the Quality of Political Debate" (1993). Faculty Publications. 287. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/faculty_publications/287 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. The Confirmation Process and the Quality of Political Debate "-Jonathan L. Entin t Because so many important public issues have become the subject of constitutional litigation, the selection of Supreme Court justices has potentially significant political consequences. For most of the twentieth century, debate over prospective appointments focused upon seemingly neutral concepts of professional competence-knowledge of the law, intelligence, experience, integrity, and aspects of character embodied in the notion of judicial tempera­ ment-rather than upon candidates' substantive views. 1 Recently, however, the debate has changed dramatically, and consideration of prospective justices' personal philosophy has dominated the confirmation process.2 The former approach might be called the competence model, the latter the ideological model. 3 Those who favor full discussion of major political issues might be expected to approve the emergence of the ideological model. After all, this approach emphasizes substantive constitutional visions and focuses directly upon subjects that lie at the heart of national debate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Art of the Possible: Everett Dirksen's Role in Civil Rights Legislation of the 1950S and 1960S
    The Art of the Possible: Everett Dirksen’s Role in Civil Rights Legislation of the 1950s and 1960s Unable to secure enfranchisement and equality for African Americans through the executive and judicial branches, civil rights proponents turned to the legislative branch in the 1950s and 1960s. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 is often criticized as a weak compromise that lacked definitive power but it was very important because it demonstrated that it was possible to pass civil rights legislation. Southern congressmen and senators prevented any legislation from passing for decades due to their domination of powerful committees and their use of the filibuster. The 1957 act showed cracks in the system. There was another civil rights act in 1960 but southern opponents restricted its scope through the use of the filibuster. Civil rights proponents in Congress learned through these experiences that if they intended to pass meaningful legislation, they had to overcome the filibuster. The tool chosen to defeat the filibuster was cloture. The Senate adopted cloture, also known as Rule 22, in 1917. It allowed sixteen or more senators to file a petition and after a set amount of debate, senators voted and if two-thirds of the members present approved it, the filibuster stopped. The rules changed in 1949 to require two-thirds of the entire Senate. Cloture was difficult to invoke because many senators felt the filibuster was the only tool they had to oppose legislation introduced by a majority. Conservatives and senators from small states were especially wary of cutting off debate. In order to achieve cloture, and ultimately meaningful civil rights legislation, supporters had to assemble bipartisan coalition for a bill.
    [Show full text]
  • Commentary on Selecting Federal Judges Thomas G
    Kentucky Law Journal Volume 77 | Issue 3 Article 11 1989 Commentary on Selecting Federal Judges Thomas G. Walker Emory University Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Judges Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Walker, Thomas G. (1989) "Commentary on Selecting Federal Judges," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 77 : Iss. 3 , Article 11. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol77/iss3/11 This Symposium Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Commentary on the Selection of Federal Judges By THoMAs G. WALKER* This conference on the Selection of Judges in the United States has shown, among other things, the rich variety of ways in which one can confront the topic of judicial selection; The two articles presented by Professors Peter Fish and Burton At- kins represent very different approaches to expanding our un- derstanding of the judiciary. As such, the articles reflect the diversity that traditionally has been associated with research regarding the selection of judges. Because the articles are dissim- ilar in methodology and focus, separate consideration is given to each article rather than attempting to integrate the two into a single perspective. The article by Professor Atkins compares the judicial selec- tion system of the United States with that of England.
    [Show full text]