"Among the weblogs, the best coverage of the Churchill controversy has been in View from a Height..." -Dave Kopel, Rocky Mountain News

"In Colorado, the Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs is covering the hot GOP primary between beer magnate Pete Coors and former Rep. Bob Schaffer with a great deal more insight than the Denver newspapers." -John Fund, OpinionJournal.com

"The Rocky Mountain Alliance offers the best of what the blogosphere has to offer." -David Harsanyi, Denver Post
Joshua Sharf

 notify list
to receive email when this site is updated, enter your email address:
 recent posts
Blogging 26 entries
Book Review 9 entries
Business 96 entries
China 2 entries
Colorado Politics 55 entries
Decision 2008 1 entries
Finance 6 entries
Flying 3 entries
General 83 entries
Higher Ed 28 entries
History 2 entries
History 2 entries
Israel 15 entries
Jewish 15 entries
Judicial Nomination 3 entries
Media Bias 5 entries
Movies 6 entries
Road Trip 5 entries
Social Investing 1 entries
Vote Fraud 7 entries
War on Terror 64 entries
Rocky Mtn. Alliance
Exultate Justi
American Kestrel
The Mangled Cat
Clay Calhoun
Mt. Virtus
My Damascus Road
Best Destiny
Thinking Right
The Daily Blogster

Friends of the Alliance
Bill Hobbs
Mile High Delphi
Flight Pundit
One Destination
Conservative Eyes
The Virginian Reporter
A Time for Choosing

other blogs
Oh, That Liberal Media
Girl In Right
One Big Swede
American Thinker
Meryl Yourish
NRO Corner
Little Green Footballs
No Left Turns
A Constrained Vision

business blogs
Carnival of the Capitalists
Cold Springs Shops
Commodity Trader
Coyote Blog
Different River
Fast Company Blog
Financial Rounds
Freakonomics Blog
Management Craft
Trader Mike
Carnival of the Capitalists Submission

business data
Inst. Supply Mgmt.
St. Louis Fed Economic Data
Nat'l Bureau of Economic Research
Economic Calendar
Stock Charts
colorado blogs
Boker Tov, Boulder
Colorado Pols
Jeff Sherman

<-?Colorado BlogRing#->

sites, not blogs
Thinking Rock Press
 help israel
Israel Travel Ministry
Friends of the IDF
Volunteers for Israel
Magen David Adom
 1939 World's Fair
1939: The Lost World of the Fair
The New York World's Fair: 1939-1940
The Last Great Fair by Jeffrey Hart
Iconography of Hope (U.Va.)
Images From the '39 Fair
 google ads
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

May 13, 2005

Maguire on Kaus on Limbaugh on Starr on Filibusters

Mickey Kaus is accusing Rush Limbaugh of Dowdifying Ken Starr's position on judicial filibusters. Tom Maguire isn't so sure. (Hat tip: The InstaProf.) Here's the transcript of the whole Nightline segment featuring Starr:


(Off Camera) And joining me now, Kenneth Starr. He's the dean of the Pepperdine University Law School. He was the independent counsel on the Whitewater investigation of the Clintons, US Solicitor General under the first President Bush and a judge for the US Court of Appeals. Let's talk first of all, Judge, about these assaults, some of them actually physical, most of them these days, though, verbal. I, I noted at the very beginning of the program, going back to the days of, of, of the calls for the impeachment of Judge Warren that it's not new ...




(Off Camera) ... to this country to have these kinds of assaults. Nevertheless, it seems to be particularly widespread and vitriolic these days. Your, your response.


Yes, the stakes are very high. Feelings are running extremely high. But you're so right. Chief Justice Warren was the subject of calls for impeachment. William O. Douglas was, as well. But there is, I think, now a more focused set of issues and concerns that are leading a number of our political leaders to be very, very stringent in their comments and, and criticisms. And I think it does raise issues with respect to the independence of the judiciary that we need to be very mindful of.


(Off Camera) Well, let's parse that a little bit. I, I don't think any judge would complain about being criticized. None of us is above criticism. But when the calls come, explicitly or implicitly for impeachment, not because a judge has committed any crime, but because the judge may hold a, a set of views that are, that are inconsistent with those, of those calling for the impeachment, what do you think of that?


I think it's unfortunate. I completely agree that as a coordinate branch of government, the judiciary is appropriately subject to criticism. That's our system. Justice Brennan put it very well in a different context when he said, in a democratic society, debate should be robust, uninhibited, open-ended and it's gonna make us uncomfortable. That is good. But where we do, in fact, step over the line, in my judgment, is when we say, or our political leaders say that we so fervently disagree, that we think that impeachment is appropriate or necessary. When those judges are, whether right or wrong, exercising their independent judgment, under Article Three of the Constitution.


(Off Camera) So, if, if Majority Leader DeLay were to come to you and say, Judge Starr, I've always admired you, you think I need to stifle it for a while? What would you tell him?


I would say, criticize but criticize in the spirit of Justice Brennan. Be robust but don't go all the way over to say that a conscientious judge or justice, exercising his or her judgment, should be impeached or, or to call for impeachment.


(Off Camera)What ...


-I, I would say moderate the tone a bit.


(Off Camera) When you were quoting Justice Brennan a moment ago, you referred to his admonition that debate should be open-ended. Which, of course, in the framework of the US Senate, is what the filibuster is, is all about. What are you views on the filibuster, as it relates specifically to judicial appointments?


Well, the Senate has the raw power and has, in fact, used it once famously, in the process of considering the proposed elevation of Abe Fortas to the Chief Justice-ship. But I think it's imprudent and unwise for senators to invoke this important device. I think it is more apt, more appropriate for legislation but not for, for judging, I think, or for ruling on judges and voting on judges. I think that does trench on the independence of the judiciary. But even more so, I think that in our system of separated powers, the President does deserve a vote on his nominees, up or down. And especially when we're talking about the courts of appeals. We're not even talking about the United States Supreme Court.


(Off Camera) -Expect, I think we are talking here about the US Supreme Court, aren't we? I mean, it, it is everybody's expectation that everything that is going on right now is just sort of a dry run for what is assumed will happen sometime, if not in the next few months, then certainly in the next year or two. And that is that President Bush will have one, two, possibly three appointments to the Supreme Court. So, what happens in the US Senate now is exceedingly important. Would you go so far as to do away with the filibuster?


I would not do away with the filibuster, in terms of Rule 22. But I would say, be judicious in its application. And I don't think that that's been happening. And I regret that.


(Off Camera) So, you're, you're opposed to the invocation of the filibuster, in this case. But you wouldn't go so far as to get rid of it.


I'd be very cautious about getting rid of it. I think that the filibuster rule's a part of our traditions. But I think it needs to be, like a lot of tools in the tool chest, very cautiously used.


(Off Camera) Judge Starr, always a pleasure, thank you very much for joining us.


My pleasure, Ted.

Koppel clearly doesn't ambush Starr. The conversation starts out discussing the heated rhetoric over judicial decisions, and then moves into the filibuster. But Starr never says it shouldn't be done, only that we should be cautious. He clearly draws a line between using it for judicial nominations and using it over legislation. And when he talks about it being "part of our traditions," he may have in mind its broader use, not this specific application. In fact, he says that it's never been used before in this way, which pretty much rules out judicial filibusters as being "part of our tradition."

I think it's not as clear as Rush would like, but if Starr's actual position is somewhere between where Kaus places it and where Rush puts him, it's much closer to Rush's view.

Posted by joshuasharf at May 13, 2005 07:53 PM | TrackBack

Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking

Back in Action : An American Soldier's Story of Courage, Faith and Fortitude

How Would You Move Mt. Fuji?

Good to Great

Built to Last

Financial Fine Print

The Balanced Scorecard for Public-Sector Organizations

The Balanced Scorecard for Government & Non-Profits

The Balanced Scorecard: Measures that Drive Performance

The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action

The Day the Universe Changed


The Multiple Identities of the Middle-East

The Case for Democracy

US Policy in Post-Saddam Iraq

A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam

The Italians

Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory

Beyond the Verse: Talmudic Readings and Lectures

Reading Levinas/Reading Talmud