Toobin: McCain’s judicial advising coming from ‘the most extreme elements of the conservative movement.’
Toobin: McCain’s judicial advising coming from ‘the most extreme elements of the conservative movement.’
In The New Yorker, legal analyst Jeff Toobin looks at what the Supreme Court might look like under a McCain presidency:
The question, as always with McCain these days, is whether he means it. Might he really be a “maverick” when it comes to the Supreme Court? The answer, almost certainly, is no. The Senator has long touted his opposition to Roe, and has voted for every one of Bush’s judicial appointments; the rhetoric of his speech shows that he is getting his advice on the Court from the most extreme elements of the conservative movement. With the general election in mind, McCain had to express himself with such elaborate circumlocution because he knows that the constituency for such far-reaching change in our constellation of rights is small, and may be shrinking. … When it comes to the Constitution, McCain is on the wrong side of the voters, and of history; thus, his obfuscations.
(HT: Huffington Post)
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
24 Responses to “Toobin: McCain’s judicial advising coming from ‘the most extreme elements of the conservative movement.’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
now that would be McInsane!
May 19th, 2008 at 1:59 pmIf McSame was able to appoint just one more justice to SCOTUS, this country would be a fascist dictatorship in a matter of months. There would be no turning back from the coming monarchy. McSame would be the death of America as we once knew her.
May 19th, 2008 at 2:04 pmOf course his advise is coming from extremists. What doesn’t anything think he’s going to do when the extremists in his party run things. If McCain gets elected the neo cons and extremist conservatives will be running things again. Any voter who doesn’t like the direction the country is headed and votes for McCain deserves exactly what we will get if he’s elected. Remember these words on November 5th. John McCain is nothing but a puppit for the rightwing. They have hijackted the so called “straight talk express” and turned it into the “lie, cheat, say anything to get elected express”. And that’s the bottom line.
May 19th, 2008 at 2:04 pmAsking any GOP politician their preferrence when it comes to nominating an individual for the SCOTUS is akin to the response one will get when one asks a patient at Bellevue who their favorite psychiatrist/psychologist is ………
May 19th, 2008 at 2:06 pmOn the campaign trail the talk is about the war, economics, etc., but rarely about a president’s choices for Supreme Court Justices. This should be of extreme importance for every citizen and voter in the United States. Scalia, Roberts, Thomas and Alito. Need I say more.
May 19th, 2008 at 2:09 pmAny “maverick” credentials McCain might have had once upon a time have quickly faded as he has become a puppet for the far right wing of his party. I think this is the current status, but it changes constantly…
– Maverick stand on campaign financing — gone
– Maverick stand on tobacco — gone
– Maverick stand on torture — gone
– Maverick stand on Bush tax cuts — gone
– Maverick stand on constitutional marriage amendment — gone
– Maverick stand on drilling in ANWR — gone
– Maverick stand on illegal immigration — fading
– Maverick stand on global warming — never really existed
– Maverick stand on Iraq and Iran — still in place
(The puppetmeisters actually kind of like McCain’s urge to bomb the entire middle east, so that probably won’t change — even though he’s a bigger warmonger than even Bush.)
All I see is a man who once had some principles (although I didn’t always agree with them), and he has surrendered them along with his soul to the real power in the GOP. OF COURSE the judges he appoints to the SCOTUS will be vetted by the far right. Along with everything else he does.
May 19th, 2008 at 2:14 pmIf this country is to be saved, the voters must turn against McCain. McSame equals Hitlers rise in 1933. Beware!
May 19th, 2008 at 2:14 pmIhhhhh, great. Just what we need - more batsh*t crazies running things.
May 19th, 2008 at 2:23 pmObama on the Supreme Court:“I was deeply disappointed in the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company,” said Senator Obama. “Contrary to Congress’ intent and longstanding precedent, the conservative majority held that workers may not sue their employers for pay discrimination that originated years earlier – even if the unequal pay continues today. This strikes at the heart of equality in this country.”
Obama: Gonzales v. Carhart — which upheld a ban on partial-birth abortion — was part of “a concerted effort to steadily roll back” access to abortions. And he ridiculed Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote that case’s majority opinion. “Justice Kennedy knows many things,” he declared, “but my understanding is that he does not know how to be a doctor.”
Obama: Roberts’ character during his confirmation hearings were largely superficial. “He loves his wife. He’s good to his dog,” … adding that judicial philosophy should be weighted more seriously than such evaluations. Obama: “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”
May 19th, 2008 at 2:45 pmI thought they said we were fighting the extremists over there so we wouldn’t have to fight them here. They were lying about that, too. Any ‘party of God’ is a detriment to democracy, Hizbollah or RNC. Such fanatics have no business in a democracy; theocracy, yes, democracy, no.
May 19th, 2008 at 2:48 pmWhat I can’t understand about Hillary supporters, is that they are so peevish, they threaten to vote McCain if Obama wins the nomination - when they must know that voting for McCain would be going directly against their own best interests. Would they really allow Roe to be overturned, just to send a spiteful message to the other democrats?
May 19th, 2008 at 2:59 pmNote when McCan’t describes the CA decision, it’s always termed ‘activist judges’.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:03 pmWhen the SOTUS is mentioned, they’re ‘constructionist’…shouldn’t that be ‘de-constructionist’? I mean, they’re tearing our Constitution apart, that certainly can’t be called ‘construction’.
When did it become the “norm” to give advice to a candidate, such as the court has on our dime?
They are not the co-branch with Presidents, they are the “third” branch as referred to in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights!
Maybe, they are looking down at us, but Congress should be looking into the unethical practices they seem to be measuring.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:15 pmToo bad the Obamite supporters alienated half the party by calling them racists, huh?
May 19th, 2008 at 3:20 pmBarfly: What I can’t understand about Hillary supporters, is that they are so peevish, they threaten to vote McCain if Obama wins the nomination
I’m one very established Clinton supporter that is certainly peeved at the blogosphere comments I’ve seen from Obama supporters (equating Hillary to McCain for example), but the reservations I have about Obama are nowhere near enough to dissuade me from voting for him in November if he becomes the nominee (which seems very likely now).
It won’t be just a party-line vote for me either–Obama has a lot of great personal and political qualities and positions that I have no problem with.
Any professed Clinton supporter that would actually vote for McCain just to spite Obama would be a complete and utter bastard on so many levels. I’m sure there a number like that–status-quo types– but the hell with them.
I hope this comment gives you some extra hope.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:24 pmWe fail to realize the impact that the Supreme Court has on every day life. The Ledbetter case was just one such example. Another was the case in which the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal in a criminal case because the motion was filed a couple days late. However, the judge was the one who specified the filing date and gave the parties the wrong date. The Supreme Court simply upheld dismissing the case because the judge’s mistake would not justify accepting an appeal under the statute.
This was an astounding result since minor mistakes of this nature happen every day. Presuming that the judge made the mistake in good faith and that there was no prejudice to the other party, then there would be no reason to refuse the appeal. The result would be just to both parties, justice would be served and such action would fall within well recognized prior practice of the courts. But then this is a court with the same judges, one of whom opined that actual innocence of a person convicted of a crime would not necessarily require overturning the conviction.
We see a conservative court that will wield a heavy hand against the individual. The conservatives will not wield nearly as much review against the government or corporations.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:28 pmZimzone: “Note when McCan’t describes the CA decision, it’s always termed ‘activist judges’.”
A pithy comment! The California Prop-22 fefintion of marriage was deemed unconstituional by the Ca-Supreme Court. What could be more constructionist than a State Supreme Court upholding the primacy of a State Constitution?
May 19th, 2008 at 3:32 pm“Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out.”Emperor Claudius
May 19th, 2008 at 3:45 pmThe Roberts Court just took away the 4th Amendment protection against illegal search and siezure. A cop can now illegaly detain you, search your car, your home, your rectum and if he finds anything contraband at all, it’s admissible. Isn’t that the definition of totalitarian police state?
May 19th, 2008 at 3:47 pmA Bush/McPutz SCOTUS would march us backwards to the glorious 9th century. The Divine Right of Kings and no rights for the common man. No Habeus Corpus, indeed, no protection from arbritrary search and seizure, no free speech, no free assembly, and the word of the King is LAW
May 19th, 2008 at 3:49 pmMore on illegal search and siezure
May 19th, 2008 at 3:51 pmhttp://news.aol.com/ political-machine/ 2008/ 04/ 23/ court-upholds-searches-in-illegal-arrest-cases/
McCain SCOTUS to America:
“GET OVER IT!!!”
May 19th, 2008 at 4:49 pmReply to #14 Perry Logan. You got it all wrong Perry, the Clinton Supporters said it during exit polling. What are we supposed to do, say it’s ok to be racist? If a voter vote for or against anyone bases on race, then they deserve to be called out. The people of West Virginia who voted against Obama because he’s black are racists and there’s no two ways about it. Look, anyone who is racist has serious self esteem problems as well as a mental issue that needs professional help. It’s bad enough for us to have a bunch of Arab terrorists running around trying to kill us, we don’t need white fools hating fellow Americans for something like race. I like you had no control over what race I was born, but unlike you race doesn’t matter to me. Answer a question for me Perry. Did the terrorist care what race the people they killed were on 9-11? Of course not, all they care about was that they were American fool. That’s why people like you are helping them divide our country. Remember what President Lincoln said: A house divided cannot stand or words to that affect. Wake up Perry “The only things we have to fear are racists and terrorists. That’s my quote. Please credit me if you use it in the future.
May 19th, 2008 at 7:47 pmIf McSame’s choice of judicial advisers is anything like his choice of Carley Fiorina the HP failed/fired CEO as “Economic Adviser” then - the Medimucil Express is headed “forward into the past” . . . .
TX Firesign Theater
May 19th, 2008 at 11:17 pm