Oh, Good Christ
May. 27th, 2009 03:55 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jmatonakThe high court, in a 5-4 ruling, overturned the 1986 Michigan v. Jackson ruling, which said police may not initiate questioning of a defendant who has a lawyer or has asked for one unless the attorney is present. - Wall Street Journal
It's really poor form to root for someone to die. But I very much wish the Chief Justice were someone a hell of a lot better, and it's a lifetime appointment.
--
President Barack Obama today announced his nomination of James Madison to the Supreme Court. Madison, who has served as the fourth President of the United States and the recording officer of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, and played a key role in the drafting of the Bill of Rights, was attacked as "insufficiently qualified" for the position, having never served as a magistrate in any court. Critics say Madison, whose Bill of Rights is extensively concerned with the rights of accused and convicted criminals, is "dangerously out of touch" and "pro-crime, to a disturbing degree." Some are bothered by Madison's presumed stances on such issues as abortion and gay marriage, as these topics are not mentioned anywhere in Madison's extensive body of writings.
Supporters point to Madison's work on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, describing them as "epochal" and "earth-shattering", and "the fundamental foundation of every case ever heard by any court in America." Jonathan Turley, professor of constitutional law at George Washington University, issued the following comment: "The Father of the Constitution. You're asking me about his qualifications? Get the fuck out of here."
Legal scholar B. L. O'hard, in a speech delivered at the Craniorectal Institute shortly after the announcement of Madison's nomination, warned that "[Madison] is living in a pre-9/11 world" and raised the issue of Madison's 1787 concurrence in a decision to abolish the Articles of Confederation, the predecessor to the current U.S. Constitution. "It's the ultimate in judicial activism," O'Hard said. "Madison has shown himself to be all too willing to overrule precedent in order to write his personal beliefs about 'good government' into U.S. law. Also, he's very short."
O'Hard added, "We have no idea if Madison is even capable of interpreting the Constitution correctly, with due deference to the Framers' original intent. Sure, he was the recording secretary of the convention, and produced the only eyewitness record of it- but that, in itself, raises questions. There were dozens of other Framers. How do we know Madison reported the views of, say, Elbridge Gerry correctly? Given Madison's liberal bias, it's only prudent to be skeptical."
Should Madison fail to be confirmed by the Senate, President Obama is widely reported to be considering Simon Peter, whose centuries of service as the judge of the dead in the Christian tradition may not outweigh his "hard left" views on topics such as foreign relations and wealth disparity.
"Peter's ideas are ridiculous. To call on Americans to 'turn the other cheek' when our country faces a grave existential threat posed by Islamofascism, is so irresponsible it borders on the treasonous," said O'Hard.
He added, "Peter's claim to be drawing his socialist, appeasement views from the Gospel is a slap in the face to millions of American Christians."
It's really poor form to root for someone to die. But I very much wish the Chief Justice were someone a hell of a lot better, and it's a lifetime appointment.
--
President Barack Obama today announced his nomination of James Madison to the Supreme Court. Madison, who has served as the fourth President of the United States and the recording officer of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, and played a key role in the drafting of the Bill of Rights, was attacked as "insufficiently qualified" for the position, having never served as a magistrate in any court. Critics say Madison, whose Bill of Rights is extensively concerned with the rights of accused and convicted criminals, is "dangerously out of touch" and "pro-crime, to a disturbing degree." Some are bothered by Madison's presumed stances on such issues as abortion and gay marriage, as these topics are not mentioned anywhere in Madison's extensive body of writings.
Supporters point to Madison's work on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, describing them as "epochal" and "earth-shattering", and "the fundamental foundation of every case ever heard by any court in America." Jonathan Turley, professor of constitutional law at George Washington University, issued the following comment: "The Father of the Constitution. You're asking me about his qualifications? Get the fuck out of here."
Legal scholar B. L. O'hard, in a speech delivered at the Craniorectal Institute shortly after the announcement of Madison's nomination, warned that "[Madison] is living in a pre-9/11 world" and raised the issue of Madison's 1787 concurrence in a decision to abolish the Articles of Confederation, the predecessor to the current U.S. Constitution. "It's the ultimate in judicial activism," O'Hard said. "Madison has shown himself to be all too willing to overrule precedent in order to write his personal beliefs about 'good government' into U.S. law. Also, he's very short."
O'Hard added, "We have no idea if Madison is even capable of interpreting the Constitution correctly, with due deference to the Framers' original intent. Sure, he was the recording secretary of the convention, and produced the only eyewitness record of it- but that, in itself, raises questions. There were dozens of other Framers. How do we know Madison reported the views of, say, Elbridge Gerry correctly? Given Madison's liberal bias, it's only prudent to be skeptical."
Should Madison fail to be confirmed by the Senate, President Obama is widely reported to be considering Simon Peter, whose centuries of service as the judge of the dead in the Christian tradition may not outweigh his "hard left" views on topics such as foreign relations and wealth disparity.
"Peter's ideas are ridiculous. To call on Americans to 'turn the other cheek' when our country faces a grave existential threat posed by Islamofascism, is so irresponsible it borders on the treasonous," said O'Hard.
He added, "Peter's claim to be drawing his socialist, appeasement views from the Gospel is a slap in the face to millions of American Christians."
