The Right Coast |
|
|
Thoughts from San Diego on Law, Politics, and Culture
Right Coasters
Gail Heriot Saikrishna Prakash Michael Rappaport Maimon Schwarzschild Thomas Smith Christopher Wonnell Email Us Gail Heriot Saikrishna Prakash Michael Rappaport Maimon Schwarzschild Thomas Smith Christopher Wonnell Links Andrew Sullivan Atlantic Blog The Buck Stops Here Corporate Law Blog Crescat Sententia Crooked Timber Curmudgeonly Clerk Daniel Drezner En Banc EveTushnet.Com FreeSpace How Appealing Instapundit Law and Econ Blog Little Green Footballs Legal Theory Blog The Leiter Reports Marginal Revolution Overlawyered Pejmanesque ProfBainbridge.Com Punishment Theory Rasmusen Weblog SFA Politics & Relig Southern Appeal SpoonsExperience USS Clueless The Volokh Conspiracy The Yin Blog Archives The Bear Flag League Aaron's Rantblog (LA) Absinthe & Cookies Accidental Jedi (Fres) Angry Clam (LA) Baldilocks BlogoSFERICS (Expat) BoifromTroy (LA) CalBlog (Los Angeles) California Republic Citizen Smash(SD) Cobb (Los Angeles) Daily Pundit (SF) Dale Franks e-Claire(Northern CA) Fresh Potatoes(Orang) Infinite Monkeys The Interocitor (LA) The Irish Lass (Sacra) Left Coast Conserv. Lex Communis (Fres) Master of None (LA) Miller's Time (Sac) Molly's Musings (SD) Mulatto Boy (LA) Howard Owens (Vent) Pathetic Earthlings) Patio Pundit Patterico's Pontifications(LA) PrestoPundit (Orange) QandO Right on the Left Beach Shark Blog (Expat) Slings and Arrows (SD) So. Cal Law Blog (LA) Tone Cluster Window Manager Xrlq (Orange) 
|
May 18, 2005
The most boring nuclear event ever By Tom Smith There's something weird in the zeitgeist surrounding the confrontation in the Senate over judicial nominees. I can't quite figure it out. For one thing, the MSM doesn't seem quite as hysterical as they should over it. They are somewhat hysterical yes, but it is certainly not the "Satan himself has been nominated to the Court" that we had with both Bork the Infidel and Clarence the Unbeliever. Is the story too complicated? Are the liberals holding fire? Or are they just outnumbered and exhausted? Or are they just rightly embarassed by the position that the President and the majority of the Senate should not together be able to select federal judges, if 41 democratic Senators disagree? I know extremely distinguished constitutional scholars have taken both sides in this debate, in some cases first the one side, and then the other. So it is hard to know what to think. But to me, the fillibuster seems an odd constitutional principle to take a stand on. And in the event, not a very good tactical choice either, as it seems the Senate rules probably will allow the majority to force debate to end and a vote to be taken. In any event, what puzzles me is why the end of the world talk has been relatively muted. If I had to guess I would say, they're saving themselves for the Supreme Court fight. Remember, when you say "right to choose," you're not taking about Republican Presidents. |