Tradeoffs necessary in pursuit of law and order

Patrick McIlheran comments in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on State v. Dubose (subject of this earlier post.

It would be bad policy to trust police and prosecutors completely, as the Constitution points out, but it would be bad policy, too, to presume that they're bunglers or malfeasants. If that's not the explicit message of the "innocence" advocates, it is plainly the impression they leave. Read their literature and you get the sense they believe justice is commonly denied.

Such intimations come at a cost. If we presume that police and prosecutors will bungle things - best they not even show suspects to eyewitnesses, since they'll probably screw it up - then we're careless with the faith people have in government to do its first duty: protect civil order.

Lessons from Blair's school reforms

Paul T. Hill says the "specialist school" formula pays off.
Policy Review June-July 2005

On the Other Hand...

Sometimes the greatest enemy of ethics is "ethics", says Joel Marks.

That is, [Adam] Smith held that things work out best for the society as a whole when each person seeks his own profit.

In effect, the professional ethics movement among businesspersons is what I call the Other Hand Theory, namely, that by conducting business ethically, profit will result (as if by an invisible hand). As noted, there is even a plausible mechanism to account for this, so that this "hand" need not seem mysterious at all, since some level of trust seems obviously necessary to conduct most human affairs, business included.

Philosophy Now June/July 2005

Mr. Foreman

from the 1997 album "Licensed to Grill" by the Bar & Grill Singers of the Austin Bar Association. [MP3]

Time to check: Are you using the right blogging tool?

Susannah Gardner says Blogs are one of the hottest publishing tools around, but picking blog software can be confusing and frustrating. Use this primer to get a feel for what's available and what will work best for you.
Online Journalism Review July 14, 2005
(via WisBlawg)

The truth, yes, but the whole truth?

Craig Gilbert reports in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that Judge John Roberts met with Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI) to discuss President Bush's nomination of Roberts to the United States Supreme Court.

But when it was over, the Senate Democrat realized how little Roberts had revealed of himself.

"He speaks very well. He speaks a lot. He responds to you. He wants to engage you. And God bless him, when he was done, it was like, 'What did he tell us?' " Kohl recalled last week. "Nothing."

The context is the issue of what are proper questions for a nominee to a judgeship, and whether earlier hearings set a precedent.

Hatch [Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) argued that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg rebuffed a variety of questions at her hearings in 1993. That didn't stop Ginsburg, who was nominated by Democrat Bill Clinton, from sailing through her confirmation. ...

Kohl said Ginsburg was reticent about many issues in her 1993 hearings, "and she got away with it."

Did Republicans Apply an Ideological Test to Bill Clinton's Supreme Court Nominees?

Bonnie Goodman at History News Network July 25, 2005

Tom Paine's Bridge

Or, building a better world with iron
by Edward G. Gray

For them [his students], it was clear: things made history. It was a curious, if partly semantic, problem. Would this make Eli Whitney and James Watt more radical than Thomas Jefferson or John Brown? ...

As I started reading Paine, I found myself drawn in an unexpected direction, albeit one that in a weird way validated what those undergrads were telling me some years ago. Paine spent most of the final twenty years of his life pursuing answers to an extraordinary technological problem. The problem was simply this: how do you create a reliable, sturdy, weather-resistant bridge that can span rivers without impeding water traffic?

Common-Place July 2005

How to Save the United Nations (If We Really Have To)

Charles Hill says The U.N. isn't dead yet--but it may soon be on life support. How to restore it to some semblance of health.
Hoover Digest Winter 2005

Vetoes strike at spending power

Legislators continue to question if one of Gov. Doyle's partial vetoes, the subject of this earlier post, violated the Wisconsin Constitution?

It appears to give [state Administration Secretary Marc] Marotta blanket power to take tax funds from the general fund and put them in "segregated" or "program" accounts - funds reserved for specialized income such as transportation taxes, lottery profits, tuition and fees.

The discussion was largely in separation of powers terms; Article IV, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitutions says "The legislative power shall be vested in a senate and assembly."

Marotta conceded that the veto questioned by legislators can be seen as giving him broad authority to shuffle money between state accounts. But he said he will respect the Legislature's traditional oversight over state spending.

Legislators "shouldn't worry," Marotta said. "They do have a role to spend money."

While it is assumed there will not be enough members of Doyle's party to join an override effort, one Democratic legislator was openly critical, and not just of the Governor.

Even a member of Doyle's own party, Rep. Dave Travis of Waunakee, said governors of both parties in Wisconsin have historically used illegally broad veto power.

But that power has been given to governors by judges, said Travis, who sued [former Gov. Tommy] Thompson over the issue.

False Exile

John Hinderaker on What's really behind the left's worry about John Roberts and the "Constitution in Exile."
Daily Standard July 25, 2005

"Don't Cross Over if You Have Any Intention of Going Back"

Politics and Literature in the Mind of Christopher Hitchens in an interview by Danny Postel

So the decision by those on the liberal left to attribute Islamic jihadism to faults of the United States-in other words, not to say, here's a chance to defend secularism against theocratic totalitarianism, but rather to dissolve that point-leaves the field to the conservatives, who will obviously do it.

The Common Reader Summer 2005

Freedom and Identity

The Federalist Society's 24th annual National Student Symposium was held at Harvard University earlier this year. The linked video is of a discussion on "Freedom and Identity: A limitation or a starting point?" by this panel:
- Ms. Jennifer C. Braceras, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
- Professor Douglas W. Kmiec, Pepperdine Law School
- Professor James Lindgren, Northwestern Law School
- Professor Richard D. Parker, Harvard Law School
- Professor Amy L. Wax, University of Pennsylvania Law School
- Chief Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg, U.S. Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Moderator
[REAL PLAYER]

The Blogger Diaries: Stepping onto the Cutting Edge

Larry Bodine says It took about 10 minutes for lawyer Andrew W. Ewalt to set up a Weblog. Sounds easy-but what happens after that? The first installment in a series that will track his blogging adventures for a year.
Law Practice July/August 2005
(via WisBlawg)

Sex and the Supremes

Jeffrey Toobin on Why the Court's next big battle may be about gay rights.
The New Yorker August 1, 2005

The Caregiving Society

As America ages, we will confront the dilemmas of caregiving on a mass scale, living long enough to suffer cognitive and physical decline in a culture that values the vigor and freedom of youth. It can be humiliating for those who think of themselves as autonomous individuals to confront the human realities of familial dependence. These are the tensions and paradoxes of caregiving in the age of individualism, writes Peter Lawler, and the "ownership society" is only one dimension of living well with aging in America.
The New Atlantis Spring 2005

Bush's War on Poverty

Jeffrey M. Jones says The Bush administration is promoting a 10-year program to eradicate homelessness in America. Is this goal attainable?
Hoover Digest Spring 2005

Between Lawyers Roundtable: The Future of Legal Blogging

Five pioneers, Denise Howell, Dennis Kennedy, Tom Mighell, Martin Schwimmer and Ernest Svenson, give the scoop on the current state-of-the-art and what to expect down the road. An exclusive discussion among lawyer-bloggers.
Law Practice July/August 2005
(via WisBlawg)

De Novo August 2005

The newsletter of our State Bar's Appellate Practice Section is, unlike some other sections', available ot non-members, and is published online in HTML rather than PDF.

This issue includes a profile of Justice Wilcox.

The Terri Schiavo Case: An Exchange

Joan Didion's earlier article, to which we
posted a link, has drawn some letters to the editor.

Joseph J. Fins, M.D. writes

... I would hope that Ms. Didion would ascribe to the rule of law and the role of the courts in adjudicating divisive issues. Ms. Didion does a disservice to the standing of the courts—and the impartial process of clinical diagnosis—by omitting these impartial judgments from her piece. Although it is the role of the social critic to question legal authority and received medical wisdom, such skepticism comes with the cost of undermining the two learned professions upon which society depends. When the standing of the courts is questioned and clinical diagnoses are perceived as value choices and not the evidence-based assessments they are, civil society is weakened. ...

Ms. Didion replies,

... As for the complaint that questioning "legal authority and received medical wisdom" undermines "the two learned professions upon which society depends," and so brings about a "weakened civil society," I would suggest only that the sturdiness of those professions rests not on any presumed infallibility but on their willingness to consider and address the very questions that Dr. Fins appears to consider best left unraised. ...

The New York Review of Books August 11, 2005

The London Bombs

John Sturrock provides post-campaign analysis.

Which gives one to reflect that if the bombs had gone off at the end of April, instead of early July, i.e. shortly before the general election, the pattern of voting might well have been significantly altered, and the connection with Iraq aired instantly and to beneficial effect.

London Review of Books July 21, 2005

Point - Counterpoint: Ferdon v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund

Lawyers for the Wisconsin Medical Society and the Wisconsin Academy of Trial Lawyers debate.
Wisconsin Law Journal July 27, 2005

"Our Flaw? We're Just Not Liberals"

Eugene Volokh on the Federalist Society.
Washington Post June 3, 2001
(via Pejmanesque, via "Juan Non-Volokh" at Volokh Conspiracy)

In today's Opinion Journal, Michael Miranda discusses The 'Evil Cabal' Of Conservative Lawyers.

Update: Randy Barnett at Volokh Conspiracy notes Miranda's piece and draws some comments.

A Matter of Opinion

Matthew Rothschild reviews A Matter of Opinion By Victor S. Navasky

Then, it being The Nation, there is the question of its politics. In the historical chapter entitled "Looking Backward," Navasky escorts us through the 140 years of the publication. He strains to defend the publication against the charge that it was soft on Stalin, but ultimately he cops a plea to Susan Sontag's indictment that subscribers to Reader's Digest would have had a better grasp of the horrors of the Soviet Union than subscribers to The Nation.

The Progressive August 2005

John Roberts, Historian

Rebecca Bernstein at History News Network July 22, 2005

In Search of Pro-Americanism

Anne Applebaum says There has never been a more popular time to be anti-American. From Beijing to Berlin, from Sydney to Sao Paulo, America's detractors have become legion. But not everyone has chosen to get on the anti-American bandwagon. Where-and among whom-is America still admired, and why? Meet the pro-Americans.
Foreign Policy July/August 2005

Reforming Health Care

Daniel P. Kessler says The U.S. health care system is in critical condition. How the president can revive it.
Hoover Digest Winter 2005

Rights for Whales?

Paola Cavalieri on the essay "Whales: Their Emerging Right to Life", Anthony D'Amato and Sudhir K. Chopra, American Journal of International Law 85 (1), 1991.

The idea of having an entitlement includes a notion of a moral right that can inform existing law or push it in a certain direction. D'Amato and Chopra elucidate this point by stressing that, in a legal context, when a court accepts the moral claim of right and recognises it as somehow subsisting in the common law all along, though legal precedent was to the contrary, it is said that the court "articulates" the preexisting right. Along these lines, an international court could articulate a right to life of whales arising from the customary law practice of their preservation. When the final stage of an entitlement - that is, of a legally enforceable right - to life for whales results from progression through the previous stages, coupled with a sense that further development is inevitable because it is morally legitimate, such entitlement is already implicit, in a fundamental sense, in international law.

TPM Online

Lawmakers question veto-changed budget

Phil Brinkman writes in today's Wisconsin State Journal ,

... there it is, in black and white: "The secretary of administration shall transfer from the balances of the general fund an amount equal to $330,000,000 during the 2005-06 fiscal year and the 2006-07 fiscal year to any appropriation under section 20 of the statutes," which specifies how state money is spent.

The sentence appeared nowhere in the 394-page budget the Legislature sent to the governor earlier this month. ...

Using the selective veto power unique in the nation to Wisconsin's governor, the governor sifted through more than 1,000 words and figures spanning two pages of the budget to string together that neat little nugget, aimed at significantly boosting state aid to schools.

If this partial veto is not overridden, some legislators have raised the possibility of challenging it in court. The relevant provisions of the Wisconsin Constitution are not specified, but appear to be,

Article VII, Section 2. "No money shall be paid out of the treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation by law. ..."

Article V, Section 10(1) (b) "... Appropriation bills may be approved in whole or in part by the governor, and the part approved shall become law."

The possible argument looks to be that the Governor cannot use the partial veto power to, in effect, create an appropriation.

Update: David Callender summarized Republican objections in The Capital Times today.

They say that's because the Democratic governor used his veto pen to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars out of the state's Transportation Fund - which is funded through the gas tax - and into state aids to local school districts.

In doing so, Doyle rewrote the budget bill to give Secretary of Administration Mark Marotta - and not the Legislature - the authority to disperse that money.

Judicial Activism - The Wisconsin Supreme Court 2005

Jim Hough of the The Hamilton Consulting Group reviews some just-issued Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions, but also looks back a bit.

The Supreme Court on March 18 handed down two opinions relating to Wisconsin law on punitive damages. The Court issued its interpretation of the Wisconsin statute [s. 895.85 (3)] adopted in the 1995 legislative session. ...

Those opinions were Strenke v. Hogner [PDF] and
Wischer v. Mitsubishi [PDF].

Despite its recognition of legislative intent to adopt a heightened standard, the majority on the Supreme Court actually used the opportunity to craft a standard, based on the Court's interpretation, that is weaker than that which existed prior to the Legislature's action in the '95 session.

That result, if surprising to many, was urged in this prescient article, Punitive Damages in Drunk-Driving Cases: What does 'intentional disregard of the rights of the plaintiff' really mean? by Lance R. Trollop in the Winter 2004 issue of The Verdict, published by the Wisconsin Academy of Trial Lawyers.

NBC News' Meet the Press July 24

With Fred Thompson, Dick Durbin, David Gregory, William Safire, Stuart Taylor & Nina Totenberg.

On the nomination of John Roberts, some questions touched on Roe v. Wade, including these asked of Sen. Durbin (D-IL).

MR. RUSSERT: It's interesting, because in your own political past, when you were a congressman in the House of Representatives in 1983, you believed that Roe vs. Wade was incorrectly decided. You filled out a questionnaire calling for a constitutional limit to ban all abortions. You wrote a constitute [sic] saying that "The right to an abortion is not guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution." ...

MR. RUSSERT: But as [sic] he said, Senator, "I believe it should be a decision made by the states," which is what you said in 1983. Would that disqualify him? ...

(via Human Events)

We're all in This Together

A profile by Dianne Molvig of our State Bar's newly sworn-in president, Michael Guerin.
Wisconsin Lawyer July 2005

Precedent from the Confirmation Hearings of Ruth Bader Ginsburg for the Conduct of Judicial Nominee

A Federalist Society white paper by Jay T. Jorgensen [PDF]

Karl Rove and Valerie Plame

David Welker examines 50 U.S.C. 421 at Ex Parte July 18, 2005.

Benefits and Costs of the U.S. Government's War Making

Robert Higgs in The Independent Review Spring 2005

How to Start Your Own Weblog And Make the Most of It

David W. Opderbeck says If you've been intrigued by the possibility of starting a blog, what's the holdup? Here are the basics demystified—from setting up to building traffic to managing blog swarms. Plus: "Finding and Monitoring Law-Related Blogs" and"Publicity in Real Space."
Law Practice July/August 2005
(via WisBlawg)

Historic agreement between state courts and tribal courts to be signed in Green Bay

From the Wisconsin Court System site:

Under the new system, state court and tribal court judges will temporarily stop actions that are filed in both courts and hold a joint hearing to determine which court should handle the case. If the judges cannot agree, a third judge will be summoned from a pool of state and tribal judges and the arguments will be re-heard until a decision on jurisdiction is reached.

The new system will be in effect in the state’s Ninth Judicial District ...

The signing ceremony will take place as part of the first-ever national conference of federal, state and tribal judges, called Walking on Common Ground, July 27-29, 2005 in Green Bay.

Doyle boosts school aid

An earlier post linked to a (since-corrected) Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article, and I included the Wisconsin Constitution provisions on the Governor's veto power. The paper reports today on further partial vetoes of the budget bill by Gov. Doyle, including one that effectively restores the increase in state education aid he sought from the lesser increase passed by the legislature. In the transportation provisions,

For instance, to increase a transfer from the transportation account to the general fund from $268 million to $427 million, he crossed out several sections of the budget. He took the "4" from a $484,000 streetscaping grant in the Village of Oregon, the "2" and the "7" from the years 2005-'07, two "0"s from references to specific laws, and four more "0"s from an $80,000 grant to Chippewa County for a pedestrian railroad crossing.

He crossed out everything between those digits.

With the vetoes, the bienniel state budget is $52.8 billion.

Who Will Judge the Inquisitors?

Richard A. Epstein says John Roberts isn't the only one who should come in for questioning.
Opinion Journal July 24, 2005

Environmentalism is dead. What's next?

Adam Werbach says

Over the past year, I, along with Michael Shellenberger, Ted Nordhaus and Peter Teague, whose work appears on these pages, have made the argument that environmentalism is dead in America. The purpose of describing the environmental movement as dead is to allow the space for a new movement to grow--a new movement that does not set arbitrary limitations for what is considered an "environmental issue," in service of building a larger progressive movement.

In These Times June 21, 2005

Questions and Answers of Faith

Daniel R. Coats says "America has developed a unique perspective on the effectiveness of faith as a force for good in government and public policy."
American Outlook Spring 2004

Ethics and Lawyer Blogs

William E. Hornsby, Jr. says So far, there's not much direction on the legal ethics of blogging. But advisory opinions surrounding e-mail and Web sites provide groundwork for what to anticipate.
Law Practice July/August 2005
(via WisBlawg)

Roberts Listed in Federalist Society '97-98 Directory

"Are you now" having been covered, it's on to "have you ever been." Today's Washington Post reports that John Roberts was listed as a member of the steering committee of the Washington, D.C., Chapter of the Federalist Society in Society's 1997-1998 Leadership Directory. Judge Roberts indicates he does not remember ever joining the Society or serving on the steering committee.

"What matters is whether he hung out with them and not whether he signed the form or wrote the dues check," said David Garrow, a law professor at Emory University. "What's important is the intellectual immersion."

Something between forgettable and intellectual immersion is probably a more realistic expectation.

Federalist Society President Eugene B. Meyer issued this statement in response to the Post story.

2005 Annual National Lawyers Convention

From the Federalist Society's national office:

July 9, 2005 marked the twentieth anniversary of the historic speech given by then-Attorney General Edwin Meese III before the American Bar Association, in which he urged that the Court be guided by a “jurisprudence of original intention.” General Meese’s remarks sparked vigorous public debate on the question of constitutional interpretation, a debate that continues today.

To commemorate General Meese’s speech and further the debate, the theme of the Federalist Society’s 2005 National Lawyers Convention is Originalism.

November 10-12, 2005
Mayflower Hotel, Washington, DC

Lautenschlager's impartiality questioned

Not exactly impartiality, but rather a question of whether or not Wisconsin's Attorney General has a conflict of interest. According to this story in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel,

Lautenschlager's presence at the July 17 [gay and lesbian pride] rally in Madison comes at the same time a lawsuit over domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples is pending against the State of Wisconsin. As attorney general, Lautenschlager is defending the state in that case.

Her position,

"What my point of view is on those cases - my personal point of view or political point of view - is often diametrically opposed to the position we take as a department," Lautenschlager said. "That's what lawyers do."

A legislator's concern,

"She is so far conflicted on this, especially with what she did at this rally," said Rep. Mark Gundrum (R-New Berlin). "You see clearly why the Legislature and local units of government feel there needs to be other legal representation in this lawsuit."

The ACLU of Wisconsin is involved in the case on the plaintiffs' side. The Alliance Defense Fund has filed a motion for the legislature seeking to intervene in the case. The article describes these organizations thus,

... the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, which advocates for individual freedoms.

... The Alliance Defense Fund, a non-profit legal firm in Scottsdale, Ariz., that is linked to evangelical Christians ...

Update: A July 27, 2005 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial makes this distinction.

She [Lautenschlager] says she knew that a representative of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, which is assisting the complainants, would speak, but not that two of the complainants themselves would do so, too. Once she learned, however, she should have backed out.

(The editorial goes on to say the AG "committed no mortal sin" and decry the involvement of the "...Alliance Defense Fund, a law firm in Arizona linked to evangelical Christians. ...")

Update 2: Judith Davidoff reports in The Capital Times of July 28, 2005 that the AG has moved for what sounds like summary judgment dismissing the lawsuit.

"We're asking for a judgment in the state's favor since there are no factual disputes and, thus, it's a matter of law," [Kelly Kennedy, spokesman for Lautenschlager] Kennedy said.

Kennedy said the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in 1992 issued a binding decision that found the state's law on domestic partnership benefits did not discriminate against homosexuals, but rather made a distinction between married and unmarried individuals.

"We believe the court can make its decision based on that precedent," he said.

The headline and subhead
"AG seeks to nix partner lawsuit
Despite gay pride rally appearance"
seem to indicate the headline writer saw a conflict.

Today's lawyers skip the ambulance

Susan Lampert Smith says

The flood of mail from personal injury attorneys started after [Eve] Galanter was in a minor car crash on University Avenue July 12. ...

Galanter is fine, but bemused.

As soon as her accident report went online at the Madison Police Department's Web site, her mailbox began filling with attorney's brochures.

Wisconsin State Journal July 25, 2005

It's Not Your Father's Web Site: Lawyers in the Blogosphere

Sarah Kellogg says It might seem hard to differentiate Weblogs from their well-known but more static cousin, the traditional Web site. Nonetheless, blogs are different-and in ways that hold powerhouse promise for legal professionals, from marketing your expertise to supporting client relationships. Plus: "A Cyber-Coffee Shop for Lawyer-Bloggers" and "A Full-On Research Tool to Illuminate a Practice Area."
Law Practice July/August 2005
(via WisBlawg)

Democracy Promotion

The undersecretary of state for global affairs, Paula J. Dobriansky, defends the administration's pro-democracy policies; Thomas Carothers responds.
Foreign Affairs, May/June 2003

What Are the Options?

Geoffrey Kemp says How can we get Tehran to give up its nuclear ambitions? By judicious use of the carrot and the stick.
Hoover Digest Winter 2005

One Nation, Under Whomever

Franklin Foer reviews Divided by God: America's Church-State Problem -- and What We Should Do About It by Noah Feldman.

He begins with the founders, whom he basically considers proto-secularists. And the principle of separation, he argues, owes as much to a taxpayer revolt as to the ideas of the Enlightenment. Colonists were forced to subsidize the Church of England, an irksome imposition on Baptists, Methodists and other non-Anglicans. At the start of the Revolution, these dissenting sects liberated themselves from religious taxes and enshrined their freedom in the Bill of Rights.

The New York Times July 24, 2005

This seems to say that the First Amendment abolished state establishment of churches and religious taxes to support them. However it would be interpreted now, it did not have that effect when enacted. Mr. Feldman's article for the Times magazine does not make such an explicit claim.

The Not-So-Unfamiliar Jefferson

Suzanne Cooper Guasco reviews Jefferson's Secrets: Death and Desire at Monticello by Andrew Burstein

Burstein's attempt to explain the Jefferson-Hemings controversy is intriguing and innovative, but it is difficult to ignore that the author makes his claims without the benefit of direct evidence.

Common-Place July 2005

Not So Supreme

[Anticipating what did not come to pass just yet] Nick Gillespie interviews A Court Divided author Mark Tushnet who explains William Rehnquist's legal legacy and why the nation's top court matters less than you think.
Reason July 2005

A stealth nominee flies into enemy territory

The July 20, 2005 issue of The Economist sums up: George Bush has nominated John Roberts, a staunch conservative, to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by the retirement of the moderate "swing voter", Sandra Day O'Connor. Republicans want a quick confirmation but the Democrats are gearing up for a battle.

Fear No Freedom

William F. Schulz reviews The Case for Democracy by Natan Sharansky (with Ron Dermer) and notes The human-rights movement's dilemma.

Is it better to put up with Pervez Musharraf's undemocratic rule in Pakistan or to risk nuclear weapons falling into the hands of extremists? When do economic sanctions generate diminishing returns? Under what circumstances is military intervention for humanitarian purposes justified? A rigid dualism is fine for fundraising but dangerous for policymaking.

Boston Review Summer 2005

An Energy Policy for the Twenty-first Century

James L. Sweeney says The challenge for the next four years: to implement energy policies that allow plentiful energy at reasonable costs, that enhance energy security, and that reduce emissions of carbon dioxide.
Hoover Digest Winter 2005

Hearings' Topic A May Be a Surprise

Topic A in the confirmation hearings for Judge John Roberts might not be topic A at all, but topic C.

Charles Babington, in today's Washington Post, put it this way.

Key Democrats, meanwhile, hinted that the hearings may focus less on abortion -- an emotional issue that many Americans associate with Supreme Court struggles -- than on the Constitution's commerce clause, which regulates interstate commerce.

"Co-Governors" Vie for Republicans' Hearts and Minds

Jeff Mayers in Wisconsin Interest Vol. 14, No. 2 [PDF]

Decline and Fall

Robert Zelnick says Broadcast journalism isn't what it used to be-and won't be again.
Hoover Digest Spring 2005

Late Merleau-Ponty, revived

Reviews by Eric Matthews of three recent books an Sen. Al Gore's favorite political philosopher.
Radical Philosophy July/August 2005

Court Nominee's Life Is Rooted in Faith and Respect for Law

A long profile of Judge John Roberts, by Todd S. Purdum, Jodi Wilgoren and Pam Belluck
The New York Times July 21, 2005

Doyle veto will slash freeway funding

Gov. Doyle has been vetoing parts of items in the recently passed budget for the next fiscal biennium. This morning's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports on his veto reducing funding for preliminary studies for reconstruction of the Zoo Interchange from $38,000,000 to $3,000,000. Which might pique your interest in the Wisconsin Constitution, if recent decisions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court haven't already done so.

Article V, Section 10(1), as all state constitutions probably do, first provides

(a) Every bill which shall have passed the legislature shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the governor.

Some constitutions provide for a line item veto. Wisconsin's is more expansive.

(b) If the governor approves and signs the bill, the bill shall become law. Appropriation bills may be approved in whole or in part by the governor, and the part approved shall become law.

It is this partial veto that, as used by Gov. Thompson, became known as the "Vanna White Veto," leading to amendment as follows.

(c) In approving an appropriation bill in part, the governor may not create a new word by rejecting individual letters in the words of the enrolled bill.

The veto is related to the larger controversy over ongoing rebuilding and possible widening of area freeways.

Separately, [Milwaukee Mayor Tom] Barrett, Citizens Allied for Sane Highways and the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin all have urged Doyle to veto the Zoo Interchange funding. They have all opposed additional lanes on I-94 and I-43 within the Milwaukee city limits - the most controversial part of the planning commission's $6.2 billion plan for rebuilding area freeways - and they're concerned the Zoo Interchange project would set the stage for adding those lanes.

The ACLU?

The Embryo Wars

The U.N., Mitt Romney, and California Corruption
The New Atlantis Spring 2005

Europe without illusions

"A category error," by Andrew Moravcsik, on the votes against the European Constitution,

The constitution is dead, Turkish membership is too, and progress in areas from services deregulation to Balkan enlargement will now be hard. Yet for the chattering classes the result was an opportunity to repolish long-held positions.

With responses by Larry Siedentop, Gisela Stuart, John Kay, Sunder Katwala, Charles Grant, Michael Maclay, and Philippe Legrain
Prospect July 2005

Bush picks D.C. judge for Supreme Court

This morning's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports on President Bush's announcement last night that he nominates U.S. Court of Appeals Judge John G. Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court.

I believe the saying is "reaction was swift," including from NARAL Pro-Choice America, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), and Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY).

Wisconsin's Senators Kohl, Feingold promise to review nominee carefully according to another piece in this morning's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

Both Democrats sit on the Senate Judiciary Committee, making Wisconsin unique among states for having two senators on the panel.

Both voted to confirm Judge Roberts to his present seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Kohl said he would not rush to judgment and would seek input about Roberts from distinguished "legal minds and community leaders" in Wisconsin.

and

"In no way do we want to prejudge, or be forced into hasty judgment by outside groups. ..."

Senator Feingold said,

"While I voted in favor of Judge Roberts to be a Circuit Court judge in 2003, the level of scrutiny that the Senate gives nominees to the highest court in the land must be even greater than that for any other appointed position in our government. ..."

This appears to apply something like a rational basis test to Court of Appeals nominees and strict scrutiny to the Supreme Court.

An accompanying analysis piece says In choice, president aims for confirmable conservative. It contains this oddity.

NARAL Pro-Choice America denounced his nomination and cited a brief he argued before the high court as deputy solicitor in the Reagan administration that said Roe vs. Wade was wrongly decided. Whether that represents his personal view or the statement of a lawyer reflecting his client is a question Democrats want answered.

I can't see why anything a lawyer put into a brief filed on behalf of a client would represent the lawyer's personal view, though it might coincide with it.

P.S. Judge Roberts was reportedly chosen as the nominee over four others after interviews by President Bush, characterized as a