DOCSLIB.ORG

Disarming the Confirmation Process

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Disarming the Confirmation Process Cleveland State Law Review Volume 50 Issue 4 Article 3 2003 Disarming the Confirmation Process Michael M. Gallagher Law Clerk, United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Judges Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Recommended Citation Michael M. Gallagher, Disarming the Confirmation Process, 50 Clev. St. L. Rev. 513 (2002-2003) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DISARMING THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS MICHAEL M. GALLAGHER1 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 515 II. BACKGROUND...................................................................... 520 A. The Constitutional Meaning of “Advice and Consent”................................................. 520 B. A [More Recent] History of the Confirmation Process ............................................ 522 1. The Bork Nomination........................................... 524 2. President George H.W. Bush................................ 526 3. President Bill Clinton ........................................... 526 4. President George W. Bush ................................... 529 a. Defining the Rules of the Game ....................................................... 529 b. The Pickering Nomination ............................ 532 c. The Owen Nomination................................... 534 d. The 2002 Midterm Elections ......................... 539 e. The Estrada Nomination ............................... 539 III. WHY IDEOLOGICAL SCRUTINY MUST END .......................... 542 A. Ideological Scrutiny Violates Principles of Separation of Powers ............................. 542 1. A Concentration of Constitutional Powers in the Presidency...................................... 542 2. Mandating a Political Mandate............................. 544 3. Institutionalized Presidential Discretion............... 546 4. Pre-Appointment Senate Prerogatives.................. 547 5. Burdening a Judicial Nominee with the Burden of Proof ...................................... 548 B. Ideological Scrutiny Lacks Historical Support ....................................................... 550 1. The Past ................................................................ 550 1Law Clerk to The Honorable Richard A. Schell, United States District Judge, Eastern District of Texas, 2003-2004. B.A., 2000, Georgetown University; J.D., 2003, University of Houston Law Center. Many thanks go to David Van Slyke and the editors of the Cleveland State Law Review for their thorough, meticulous editing of this Article. I am also grateful to Professor Sidney Buchanan for his sage advice and commentary, to Brett Young for spirited political commentary, and to Rajesh Sharma for unyielding friendship. The views and opinions expressed in this Article are those of the author alone. 513 Published by EngagedScholarship@CSU, 2003 1 514 CLEVELAND STATE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 50:513 2. The Recent Past .................................................... 551 3. The Future ............................................................ 551 C. Continued Ideological Scrutiny Will Ensure an Endless Cycle of Political Retribution ................................................................... 552 D. Continued Ideological Scrutiny Will Worsen the Confirmation Process Even Further......................................................................... 557 1. Failed “National Referenda” ................................ 557 2. A Regrettable Fusion of Law and Politics ........................................................... 558 3. Senators as Law Professors .................................. 559 4. Result-Oriented Confirmation Hearings............... 560 a. Results Instead of Rational Analysis ......................................................... 560 b. An Illustration ............................................... 562 5. Return of the “Stealth Nominee”.......................... 563 E. Continued Ideological Scrutiny Will Harm the Federal Judiciary ........................................ 564 1. The Myth of the “Mainstream” ............................ 564 2. The Myth of Predicting a Judge’s Votes........................................................ 571 3. The Myth of Judicial Omnipotence...................... 580 IV. WHY IDEOLOGICAL SCRUTINY MUST CONTINUE—AND A REPLY.................................................. 583 A. The Senate Is Better Suited Than the President to Represent the People’s Interests in the Confirmation Process ......................... 583 B. Continued Ideological Scrutiny Will Lead to Ideological Balance in the Federal Judiciary......................................................... 584 C. Continued Ideological Scrutiny Will Depoliticize the Confirmation Process....................... 586 V. DISARMING THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS .......................... 588 A. Reforming Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings .................................................... 588 1. Ideological Abstention.......................................... 588 2. Moral Evaluation of Judicial Nominees ............... 589 3. Senators Instead of Law Professors...................... 591 B. Sending Each Nomination to the Senate Floor................................................................. 591 https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol50/iss4/3 2 2002-03] DISARMING THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS 515 C. Presidential Consultation with the Senate................... 592 VI. CONCLUSION........................................................................ 593 I. INTRODUCTION In his second term of office, the President nominates a Circuit Court judge to fill a recent vacancy on the Supreme Court. The nominee, respected by practitioners and jurists alike, quickly receives a rating of “Well Qualified” from the American Bar Association. In announcing the nomination, the President praises the nominee’s qualifications, temperament, and character. Regrettably, the announcement of the nomination is the high point for the nominee. Almost immediately, interest groups mobilize against the nominee. The nominee’s previous decisions are scoured, scorned, and misrepresented. Charges are leveled that the nominee is an ideologue. Heeding the call to battle, many Senators in the opposition party quickly criticize the nominee’s ideology, and announce their intentions to vote against the nominee. Interest groups quickly release reports charging that the nominee’s views are “outside the mainstream” of legal thought. The confirmation hearing turns bitter; the nominee’s stock continues to decline. Senators demand that the nominee comment on hypothetical questions of constitutional law, and they label the nominee’s judicial philosophy as politically driven. After much mudslinging and overturning of stones by Senators, the Senate rejects the nomination by a significant margin. The President immediately criticizes the Senate and laments the current state of the confirmation process. In response, Senators assert that the Senate should have an equal role in the confirmation process. For some, the previous two paragraphs might conjure up images of the confirmation hearing of Judge Robert Bork.2 Given the recent, pervasive use of ideology3 as a relevant factor in judicial confirmations, the previous two paragraphs would plainly describe the confirmation hearings of Justices Antonin Scalia4 or Ruth 2Nominated by President Ronald Reagan for Justice Lewis Powell’s seat on the Supreme Court, Judge Robert Bork experienced a very controversial and contentious hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. In the end, the Senate rejected his nomination by a vote of 58- 42. Edward Walsh & Ruth Marcus, Bork Rejected for High Court; Senate’s 58-42 Vote Sets Record for Margin of Defeat, WASH. POST, Oct. 24, 1987, at A1. 3One can define ideology as “[t]he body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.” THE AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY 343 (2d ed. 1983). One commentator defines ideology as “a systemic body of concepts especially about human life or culture.” Stephen B. Presser, Should Ideology of Judicial Nominees Matter? Is the Senate’s Current Reconsideration of the Confirmation Process Justified?, 6 TEX. REV. L. & POL. 245, 246 & n.1 (2001) (quoting MERRIAM WEBSTER’S COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY 575 (10th ed. 1996)). Whatever the wisdom of labeling judges as “liberal,” “conservative” or “moderate” may be, it is fair to say that “conservative” judges believe “that the Constitution should be interpreted in a textualist and originalist manner,” while “liberal” judges “accept a more open-ended, interpretive methodology.” John O. McGinnis, The President, The Senate, the Constitution, and the Confirmation Process: A Reply to Professors Strauss and Sunstein, 71 TEX. L. REV. 633, 634 n.6 (1993) [hereinafter McGinnis, A Reply]. 4 See ANTONIN SCALIA, A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION: FEDERAL COURTS AND THE LAW: AN ESSAY (1997) [hereinafter SCALIA, MATTER OF INTERPRETATION] (offering a detailed explanation of Justice Scalia’s judicial philosophy); see also Antonin Scalia, The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1175 (1989) [hereinafter Scalia, Rule of Law]. Published
Load more

Recommended publications
  • By Patrick James Barry a Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of The
    CONFIRMATION BIAS: STAGED STORYTELLING IN SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARINGS by Patrick James Barry A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (English Language and Literature) in the University of Michigan 2015 Doctoral Committee: Professor Enoch Brater, Chair Associate Professor Martha Jones Professor Sidonie Smith Emeritus Professor James Boyd White TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 SITES OF THEATRICALITY 1 CHAPTER 2 SITES OF STORYTELLING 32 CHAPTER 3 THE TAUNTING OF AMERICA: THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARING OF ROBERT BORK 55 CHAPTER 4 POISON IN THE EAR: THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARING OF CLARENCE THOMAS 82 CHAPTER 5 THE WISE LATINA: THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARING OF SONIA SOTOMAYOR 112 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION: CONFIRMATION CRITIQUE 141 WORK CITED 166 ii CHAPTER 1 SITES OF THEATRICALITY The theater is a place where a nation thinks in public in front of itself. --Martin Esslin, An Anatomy of Drama (1977)1 The Supreme Court confirmation process—once a largely behind-the-scenes affair—has lately moved front-and-center onto the public stage. --Laurence Tribe, Advice and Consent (1992)2 I. In 1975 Milner Ball, then a law professor at the University of Georgia, published an article in the Stanford Law Review called “The Play’s the Thing: An Unscientific Reflection on Trials Under the Rubric of Theater.” In it, Ball argued that by looking at the actions that take place in a courtroom as a “type of theater,” we might better understand the nature of these actions and “thereby make a small contribution to an understanding of the role of law in our society.”3 At the time, Ball’s view that courtroom action had an important “theatrical quality”4 was a minority position, even a 1 Esslin, Martin.
    [Show full text]
  • GLOBAL EMBRACE Wants to Do After Graduation, Zhou Says Her Long-Term Goal Is to Work in the Public Sector at an International Level
    SUPEOPLE Cerqueiro et al.: Orange People to go through that if they have another way around it.” For the past two academic years, Zhou worked with a group of 10 to 20 interna- tional students and helped them settle in by introducing them to resources on campus, comforting them when they had personal issues, and organizing social events. Zhou also became involved with the SU chap- ter of the Chinese Scholars and Students Association (CSSA). As director of its com- munications department, Zhou helped devel- op the 2013 issue of CSSA Magazine, which introduced SU Chinese students to college life in America and was written roughly 80 percent in English and 20 percent in Chinese. While mentoring international students, Zhou’s commitment to nurturing others inspired her to work as a resident advisor (RA). Okhumale Igetei ’15, who had Zhou as his RA at Lawrinson Hall, appreciated the way she connected with students and hosted floor dinners. “If you needed anything, you could just approach her,” Igetei says. “She really helped us get comfortable—the whole Syracuse transition, moving to college and RUITONG“FLORA” ZHOU everything.” But Zhou aspires to apply her counseling and administrative skills beyond campus. Although she’s still debating what she GLOBAL EMBRACE wants to do after graduation, Zhou says her long-term goal is to work in the public sector at an international level. “I want to work ALTHOUGH SHE COMES FROM HARBIN, CHINA, IT DIDN’T either in government for the people or work in a big consulting take long for Ruitong “Flora” Zhou ’14 to embrace life at SU after group and have government or a government department as my she first arrived four years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Tradition and Morality in Constitutional Law
    The Francis Boyer Lectures on Public Policy TRADITION AND MORALITY IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Robert H. Bork American Enterprise lnstitute for Public Policy Research TRADITION AND MORALITY IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW The Francis Boyer Lectures on Public Policy TRADITION AND MORALITY IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Robert H. Bork American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research ISBN 0-8447-1370-8 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 84-62693 @1934 by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington, D.C., and London. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever with· out permission in writing from the American Enterprise Insti tu te except in the case of brief quotations embodied in news articles, critical articles, or reviews. The views expressed m the publications of the American Enterprise Institute are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, advisory panels, officers, or trustees of AEI. "American Enterprise Institute" and @) are registered service marks of the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. Printed in the United States of America American Enterprise Institute 1150 Seventeenth Street, N. W, Washington, D. C. 20036 THE FRANCIS BOYER LECTURES ON PUBLIC POLICY The American Enterprise Institute has initiated the Francis Boyer Lectures on Public Policy to examine the relationship between business and government and to develop contexts for their creative interaction. These lectures have been made possible by an endowment from the SmithKline Beck­ man Corporation in memory of Mr. Boyer, the late chairman of the board of the corporation. The lecture is given by an eminent thinker who has developed notable insights on one or more aspects of the relationship between the nation's private and public sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • Bloody Crossroads African-Americans and the Bork Nomination: a Bibliographic Essay J
    Howard University Digital Howard @ Howard University Selected Speeches J. Clay Smith, Jr. Collection 1-11-1992 Bloody Crossroads African-Americans and The Bork Nomination: A Bibliographic Essay J. Clay Smith Jr. Follow this and additional works at: http://dh.howard.edu/jcs_speeches Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Smith, J. Clay Jr., "Bloody Crossroads African-Americans and The Bork ominN ation: A Bibliographic Essay" (1992). Selected Speeches. Paper 151. http://dh.howard.edu/jcs_speeches/151 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the J. Clay Smith, Jr. Collection at Digital Howard @ Howard University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Selected Speeches by an authorized administrator of Digital Howard @ Howard University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 173 "Bloody Crossroads" AFRICAN-AMERICANS and the BORK NOMINATION: A BIBLIOGRAPHIC ESSAY J. Clay Smith, Jr.* Two diverging traditions in the mainstream of Western political thought-one "liberal," the other "conservative"-have competed, and still_ compete, for control of the democratic process and of the American constitutional system; both have controlled the direction of our judicial policy at one time or another. - Alexander M. Bicke11 The clash over my nomination was simply one battle in-this long-running war for control of our legal culture. - Robert H. Bork2 On July 1, 1987 President Ronald Reagan announced his nomination of Judge Robert H. Bork to succeed Justice Lewis Powell * Professor of Law, Howard University School of Law. Alexander M. Bickel, The Morality Of Consent 3 (1975), hereafter, Morality Of Consent. 2 Robert H. Bork, The Tempting of America The Political Seduction of the Law 2 (1990), hereafter, Tempting of America.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorizing the Constitution of Originialism: Clarence Thomas at the Rubicon
    Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality Volume 16 Issue 2 Article 2 December 1998 Colorizing the Constitution of Originialism: Clarence Thomas at the Rubicon Samuel Marcosson Follow this and additional works at: https://lawandinequality.org/ Recommended Citation Samuel Marcosson, Colorizing the Constitution of Originialism: Clarence Thomas at the Rubicon, 16(2) LAW & INEQ. 429 (1998). Available at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/lawineq/vol16/iss2/2 Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality is published by the University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. Colorizing the Constitution of Originalism: Clarence Thomas at the Rubicon Samuel Marcosson* I. Justice Clarence Thomas at the Rubicon: A Story From an Alternate Reality ............................................................ 1 II. Justice THOMAS, dissenting .............................................. 5 III. Justice THOMAS, concurring in part and concurring in the judgm ent ..................................................................... 22 IV. Meanwhile, Back in Our Universe ................................... 27 A. What Justice Thomas Would Have Done in Loving .... 31 1.The Impossibility of Reconciling Color-Blindness With the Original Understanding of the Equal Protection Clause ................................................... 32 a. The Revisionist Case for a Color- Blind Interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause: Thomas' Salva- tion? ................................................. 32 b. Invocation of the Declaration of In- dependence: Natural Law to the Rescue? ......................
    [Show full text]
  • Notes and Sources for Evil Geniuses: the Unmaking of America: a Recent History
    Notes and Sources for Evil Geniuses: The Unmaking of America: A Recent History Introduction xiv “If infectious greed is the virus” Kurt Andersen, “City of Schemes,” The New York Times, Oct. 6, 2002. xvi “run of pedal-to-the-medal hypercapitalism” Kurt Andersen, “American Roulette,” New York, December 22, 2006. xx “People of the same trade” Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, ed. Andrew Skinner, 1776 (London: Penguin, 1999) Book I, Chapter X. Chapter 1 4 “The discovery of America offered” Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy In America, trans. Arthur Goldhammer (New York: Library of America, 2012), Book One, Introductory Chapter. 4 “A new science of politics” Tocqueville, Democracy In America, Book One, Introductory Chapter. 4 “The inhabitants of the United States” Tocqueville, Democracy In America, Book One, Chapter XVIII. 5 “there was virtually no economic growth” Robert J Gordon. “Is US economic growth over? Faltering innovation confronts the six headwinds.” Policy Insight No. 63. Centre for Economic Policy Research, September, 2012. --Thomas Piketty, “World Growth from the Antiquity (growth rate per period),” Quandl. 6 each citizen’s share of the economy Richard H. Steckel, “A History of the Standard of Living in the United States,” in EH.net (Economic History Association, 2020). --Andrew McAfee and Erik Brynjolfsson, The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies (New York: W.W. Norton, 2016), p. 98. 6 “Constant revolutionizing of production” Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), Chapter I. 7 from the early 1840s to 1860 Tomas Nonnenmacher, “History of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • WHAT ROBERT BORK WILL MEAN for the SUPREME COURT and AMERICAN JUSTICE by Jamie Raskin, Senior Fellow, People for the American Way
    BORKING AMERICA WHAT ROBERT BORK WILL MEAN FOR THE SUPREME COURT AND AMERICAN JUSTICE By Jamie Raskin, Senior Fellow, People For The American Way photo courtesy of Gage Skidmore The key thing I think the president is going to do... It’s going to be appointing Supreme Court and Justices throughout the judicial system. As many as half the Justices in the next four years are going to be appointed by the next president. -Mitt Romney photo courtesy of Gage Skidmore YES, AMERICA, ROBERT BORK IS BACK Many presidents leave their most enduring legacy to the nation Romney is also presumably trusting that, ever since Bork resigned in the Justices that they name to the Supreme Court and the from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of federal judges that they put on the bench. So what inspired Columbia Circuit to launch a career as a conservative polemicist former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney to name former with the American Enterprise Institute,1 most of the public has judge Robert Bork to co-chair his presidential campaign advisory tuned out his increasingly bitter diatribes against the “feminized”2 committee on law, the Constitution and the judiciary? Supreme Court and his embarrassing tirades against “American cultural decline,” and the social “rot and decadence” of our country. Surely Governor Romney meant to persuade activists on the Religious Right and in the Tea Party that he is ready to do battle- But Romney’s elevation of Bork to advise him on the kinds -not just to entrench the Corporate Court that rules today, but to of judges who should serve on the Supreme Court and the nominate people to the bench who will dismantle what remains federal bench spells serious trouble for the American people.
    [Show full text]
  • Antonin Scalia*
    ANTONIN SCALIA* I was a friend of Bob Bork’s for many years. I worked with him, under Attorney General Edward Levi, in Gerald Ford’s Justice Department, where he was Solicitor General and I was Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel. Our other colleagues included Carla Hills and, later, Rex Lee as heads of the Civil Division, Richard Thornburgh as head of the Criminal Division, and Stanley Pottinger as head of the Civil Rights Division—a distinguished group, but none more distin‐ guished than Bork. Later, I worked with Bob as a colleague on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, where I very much liked the high diet of administrative law cases, and he not so much (I always thought he should have accepted the Administration’s earlier offer to nominate him for the Second Circuit, where his interests in antitrust and business law would have had fuller play). Robert Bork was a rare combination of integrity and intellec‐ tual brilliance. And it was both of those qualities that led to the regrettable rejection of his nomination to the Supreme Court. His integrity caused him, as the ranking officer at the Depart‐ ment of Justice after the resignations of the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, to execute President Nixon’s directive to fire Archibald Cox. As he explained it, the Presi‐ dent had the lawful authority to fire Cox (who had no inde‐ pendent status protected by law, as later Independent Counsels had); and while it was appropriate for some of the President’s appointees to register their disagreement with that action by resigning, it was not appropriate, or, indeed, compatible with the Constitution, for all presidential appointees to denude the Justice Department of leadership, thereby frustrating lawful presidential action.
    [Show full text]
  • Leadership in Times of Transition
    U.S. Department of Defense Executive Development Program LEADERSHIP IN TIMES OF TRANSITION FEBRUARY 21–24, 2016 HOSTED BY The Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) IN COLLABORATION WITH Robertson Foundation Consortium of Universities Syracuse University, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs Tufts University, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy Texas A&M University, Bush School of Government and Public Service University of California, San Diego, School of Global Policy and Strategy University of Maryland, School of Public Policy SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY TIME FEB. 21 FEB. 22 FEB. 23 FEB. 24 8:45 AM BREAKFAST BREAKFAST MODULE 1: INTERAGENCY DECISION-MAKING IN TRAVEL TO A COMPLEX WORLD MODERATED BY KATHLEEN HICKS DOD ON OWN 9 AM PART I: COUNTERING NONSTATE ACTORS JUAN ZARATE SIMULATION: PRINCIPALS COMMITTEE MEETING PART II: INTERAGENCY HOTWASH AND WRAP-UP COOPERATION AND COLLABORATION ARRIVE AT DOD AND JOHN HAMRE, MICHAEL GREEN TRANSFER THROUGH JAMES STAVRIDIS, SECURITY JAMES STEINBERG, RYAN 10 AM BREAK CROCKER, AND PETER COWHEY PART III: DOMESTIC SECURITY COORDINATION CHALLENGES CONVERSATION WITH PAUL STOCKON SECRETARY ASH CARTER 11 AM PART IV: RAPID INTRO. OF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT TRAVEL TO CSIS BREAK DENISE ZHENG AND ANDREW HUNTER CLOSING LUNCH MODULE WRAP-UP 12 PM CONVERSATION WITH DR. ZBIGNIEW MODULE 2: LEADERSHIP AND BRZEZINSKI TRANSITION: FUNCTIONAL IMPERATIVES JOHN HAMRE ROBERT MURRETT 1 PM PANEL I: NATIONAL SECURITY MODULE 3: CYBER CRISIS LEADERSHIP, REFORM, SIMULATION: DEFENSE AND TRANSITION AND
    [Show full text]
  • The Unjudiciousness of Originalism – a Cover for Reactionary Bias from the Bench
    The Unjudiciousness of Originalism – A Cover for Reactionary Bias from the Bench With the impending confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett, another self-described “originalist” to the Supreme Court, many of us, all too belatedly, I confess, are trying to get a clear vision of what this judicial philosophy really is all about. Most famously championed by the late Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia, whom Barrett characterizes as her mentor, originalism is also claimed to be the legal philosophy of Supreme Court justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, John Roberts, and Brett Kavanaugh. To qualify this list, Justice Roberts admits only to a softer version of the philosophy, one which allows for consideration of subsequent reflection on a matter, while Kavanaugh has confessed only to being a “textualist”, while being widely considered by others to being in the originalism fold. Originalism as an explicit judicial philosophy is often traced back to Judge Robert Bork, who in the early seventies introduced it as a set of “neutral principles”. Since then, originalism is almost always associated with contemporary political conservative ideology and especially with members and supporters of the Federalist Society, which was formed by conservatives and libertarians in 1982 to promote originalism and associated legal philosophies. In recent years, more and more judges of this ideological bent have been appointed to the federal bench, and it is incumbent on us to come to grips with what it is all about. For too long, judges have taken cover behind this philosophy and shielded themselves from the discontent and suspicion of those they purportedly serve on the insinuated grounds that originalism is a legal theory and as such its proper evaluation is a matter of expert professional judgment by those in the field, beyond the ken of the people at large.
    [Show full text]
  • What Kind of Judge Is Brett Kavanaugh?
    de•C ARDOZOnovo L AW R EVIEW WHAT KIND OF JUDGE IS BRETT KAVANAUGH? A Quantitative Analysis Elliott Ash† & Daniel L. Chen† This article reports the results of a series of data analyses of how recent Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh compares to other potential Supreme Court nominees and current Supreme Court Justices in his judging style. The analyses reveal a number of ways in which Judge Kavanaugh differs systematically from his colleagues. First, Kavanaugh dissents and is dissented against along partisan lines. More than other Judges and Justices, Kavanaugh dissents at a higher rate during the lead-up to elections, suggesting that he feels personally invested in national politics. Far more often than his colleagues, he justifies his decisions with conservative doctrines, including politicized precedents that tend to be favored by Republican-appointed judges, the original Articles of the Constitution, and the language of economics and free markets. These findings demonstrate the usefulness of quantitative analysis in the evaluation of judicial nominees. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................................ 71 I. PREVIOUS LITERATURE ..................................................................... 72 † Assistant Professor of Law, Economics, and Data Science, ETH Zurich. Contact: [email protected]. † Professor at the Toulouse School of Economics and the Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, Directeur de Recherche at Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS),
    [Show full text]
  • Convocation Program
    College of Arts & Sciences and Maxwell School of Citizenship & Public Affairs UNDERGRADUATE CONVOCATION May 2021 Program MASTER OF CEREMONIES Karin Ruhlandt, Dean College of Arts and Sciences NATIONAL ANTHEM GREETINGS Karin Ruhlandt, Dean College of Arts and Sciences David Van Slyke, Dean Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs ALUMNI ADDRESS Gezzer Ortega, M.D., MPH ’03 SENIOR ADDRESS Alaba Anna Tam Danagogo ’21 COLLEGE MARSHALS Alaba Anna Tam Danagogo ’21 Biology, English and Textual Studies Lia Zhu Li Chabot ’21 Citizenship and Civic Engagement, Economics Hanna Martin ’21 Writing and Rhetoric, Citizenship and Civic Engagement, Magazine RECOGNITIONS Karin Ruhlandt, Dean College of Arts and Sciences PRESENTATION OF GRADUATES ALMA MATER Scholarships, Awards and Prizes The designation “Distinction” indicates that, in addition to outstanding major and cumulative grade point averages, the student has completed a thesis or senior project in the department of the major. All listings of distinction are pending completion of departmental distinction requirements. AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDIES ANNA JULIA COOPER/CARTER G. WOODSON ACHIEVEMENT AWARD Makeda Cheru FANNIE LOU HAMER SERVICE AWARD Ayaa Mesbah W.E.B. DU BOIS AWARD Makeda Cheru ANGELA DAVIS/WALTER RODNEY AWARD Grace Asch RENATE SIMSON AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN THE HUMANITIES Khari Brandes ANTHROPOLOGY LAMBDA ALPHA NATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY, DELTA CHAPTER OF NEW YORK (LAHS) Anna Therese Henderson Alexandra Sheridan CROWN SCHOLAR HONORS Katelyn Rochelle Bajorek Dylan Leitfred Carfagno Buck DISTINCTION IN ANTHROPOLOGY Katelyn Rochelle Bajorek Julia Cutler Bailey Walts ART AND MUSIC HISTORIES ABRAHAM VEINUS PRIZE FOR BEST UNDERGRADUATE PAPER IN MUSIC HISTORY AND CULTURES Hanna Dunakin continued from previous page DISTINCTION IN ART HISTORY Bridget Claire Fullam SIDNEY THOMAS PRIZE FOR BEST UNDERGRADUATE PAPER IN ART HISTORY Zora T.
    [Show full text]