We knew that Trump-appointed judges could do great harm to the laws of the land. And Judge Doughty's ruIing is truly harmful. But you constantly note that we can be hopeful but not complacent. We can slowly and consistently chip away at the poor decisions/plans of the Republican minority. I appreciated your call to action on Independence Day, “What are we willing to do now?”. The simple answer for right now: engage with the Ohio August 8 election to GOTV. The Movement Voter Project (movement.vote) is directing people to https://votenoinaugust.org/, from ONE PERSON=ONE VOTE and posted information in a blog back in May - https://movement.vote/an-existential-moment-for-ohio/. It is critical to show Republican legislatures and judges that are playing fast and loose with the basic tenets of our democracy that We the People will defeat them.
Betsy, like you, I was taken aback by Robert’s post title and commentary today, “Judges Gone Wild.” OMG!! It reinforces my appreciation of how much damage the former guy did in just four years along with right wing media. (I like to include “ring wing media” because somewhere along our journey they must be held accountable.) But that’s another call to action.
For now, I got some postcards written for the Ohio August vote prior to leaving the country. We have much to do but I reiterate Robert’s reference to Rebecca Solnit: “...we must fight back.”
Our country has a lot of history that we need to defend AND a lot of history we have been come to recognize we must make. There is no one who will come to our aid. As Joyce Vance writes in her sign off, “we’re in this together.”
So a rogue MAGA judge at least temporarily puts a stop to efforts of the State Department, DOJ, and Homeland Security to meet with leading social media companies to discuss countermeasures to prevent foreign interference in the 2024 elections.
Just remember the efforts of Senator McConnell to do exactly the same in 2016
Obviously there is a pattern there. They have no shame. Years ago some participants at MAGA events showed up in t-shirts sporting the slogan 'Better Russian than Democrat'. Seems like they meant it.
I am more convinced than ever the Democrats have a communication problem. We have no firebrands who can put fire into facts. We have Silent Schumer and a House leader young enough to be a bur in MAGAS side but strangely quiet for his age. And of course our President, who is nothing if not a masterful politician, but a man of tepid tones. I think age sticks to Biden and not Trump because he is lukewarm and too sick cool (learned that term from my nephew). So how can we get a larger audience for firebrands such as you Robert who have the ability to convert cold facts into damning indictments (I would love to have seen you in a courtroom). Who would you recommend as fellow firebrands? I think of Jennifer Rubin, whose brilliance is only exceeded by her smoldering anger; AOC; and Sheldon Whitehouse; the Tennessee Three. By the way, what has happened to my senator, Elizabeth Warren? How can we galvanize the way the Tea Party did? Indivisible has the network across America but they seem to be resting on its laurels. How do we bring out people in a mass who can feed off each others burning hearts? We need to protest, protest, protest, making life uncomfortable for the next 16 months.
Hi, John. I can think of one firebrand who is a good communicator: You! Write letters to the editor, start a blog, join Threads (Instagram's challenger to Twitter) etc.
That is high raise considering it comes from you, who gives me hope and inspiration every day. I ain’t no Robert Hubbell though. I’ll see what my editor thinks!
Mark, I like the second half of your post because you are right to work to identify and promote those who can get the Dems message out. But, I ask that you and others please stop helping to other side’s narrative by opening the post with the negative take on Biden, Schumer or Hakeem Jeffries. They have contributed a lot and Biden, in particular, has been cited by many for his masterful handling of the State of the Union message and the phones budget crises.
We all have to pitch in to get the messaging out while recognizing everyone has played and will continue to give their best.
I recall that, not all that long ago, a conservative here remarked that Putin would be a better leader for this country than Biden. The same mentality wanted to see Lindbergh, instead of Roosevelt; McClellan, instead of Lincoln. There will always be those who see the Earth as flat and the epidermis, or gender, of a person as proof of superiority. Such people are destined for the dust bin.
Absolutely! Never forget what McConnell did in 2016. And always remember that McConnell was a major player who brought Citizens United back from the dead after it had been stopped at the appeals court level. He was a co-plaintiff who resurrected the case. And ever since he has gathered up huge sums of money to aid Republicans in their elections, most notably Susan Collins.
We must doggedly expose and depose McConnell. He is long overdue to be put out to pasture like a lot of the Kentucky thoroughbreds who have managed to survive Churchill Downs.
This is so crazy. It is the flip side of the 60’s. Better Red than Dead. Do these guys have a clue? They are so brainwashed that they would take the gulag over democracy? Ignorance is anything but bliss.
Robert, I wouldn't claim to understand the legalities of the rulings you reported on tonight. However, based on the wild and alarming pronouncements of a couple of misguided (at best) judges, I can only say that it's a good thing you took a few days off in the past week or so. I sense that you're going to need all your strength, energy and patience to continue the good fight to help defeat the measures you described in tonight's report. You will surely have the company of numerous scholars as allies.
I’ve got a couple of questions. First, how did Trump select people to appoint to the various courts? Second, how did Lori Smith, a person with no actual business and no actual gay potential clients come to file a suit? I suppose I’m asking has anyone followed the money to see who was bankrolling all of this and equally important, what are their motivations? These people are the true “deep state”, Trump, McConnell, et al, are the puppets. The folks behind the curtain need to be exposed and talked about every single day.
I hope investigative reporters (Maddow, NYT, WAPO) are working on exposing who exactly are the people dumping millions into these cases: name names, expose the agendas, take off the hoods.
Judge Doughty and the majority of the Fifth Circuit are interesting (and horrifying) examples of how a little knowledge is a lot worse than a lot of knowledge if you're going to serve in the Judiciary. And it's proof positive, if anymore were needed, that Leonard Leo and Mitch McConnell had only their partisan interests at heart and were not deeply interested in intellect or qualifications. We're all worse off for that. -------> Proving, if anyone needed proof, that money has to be wrung out of our politics. Over-writing Citizens United would be a good first step.
As someone with a law degree, licensed to practice in two states even though not a practicing lawyer, I find it really hard to believe that these judges ever legitimately even passed the bar exam. It is really a shame the extent to which almost all of our true professions, like medicine, law, and accounting to name a few, have allowed themselves to sink to such lack of standards, self-regulation and self-policing.
The whole purpose of having professions and enabling them the right to set standards and to control licensure is that they are to enforce relatively high basic standards of knowledge, proficiency, and ethics. The failure of the professions to do this has meant that they have been essentially taken over by industries (like managed care in medicine and mega consulting firms in accounting), or they have been eclipsed in influence by private organizations (like the Federalist Society) and have ceased enforcement around all but the most egregious ethical and proficiency failures. It’s a shame and it’s another indication of the need for reassessment and revival of basic principles of personal and professional integrity and the idea of service in the public interest.
I really feel that the Law schools these justices attended should revoke their diplomas and the legal associations in charge of continuing accreditation of lawyers, should disbar them. That would immediately disqualify them from sitting on the bench. I also think that these corrupt justices are in many cases indicative of what is wrong with legacy admissions, as well as buying your way in. Coney Barrett is the only one on the current Supreme Court who went to Notre Dame instead of Harvard or Yale for law school. Their programs are all suspect to me. What were they teaching? How do they confer degrees on so many people who turn out to be crooks. Perhaps we should all be writing letters to the American and other Bar Associations and asking that they disbar these people. Judge Terry Dougherty went to Louisiana State Law School. They are missing an ethics course or two and a process for screening out men with neanderthal mentalities. Judge Reed O'Conner went to Southern Texas College of Law. Again these schools all need ethics courses.
As far as I know every state bar exam has an ethics section. Loads of questions about what you can and can't do with the retainer funds deposited in the trust account. There is a rule pretty much everyone knows about not lying to the court. However, once one IS the court, lying appears to be A-OK nowadays.
I'm not a Harvard grad, but do remember that the Obamas went there too. I don't really know if legacy admissions apply to law school, but if they do you may be on to something regarding quality for some folks. I will say that in my years of practice I often encountered other lawyers who were very, very dumb.
I wouldn't approve of Malia Obama getting in to Harvard as a legacy either. I hope she didn't. I assume most universities want to accept a president's daughters though. Her sister Sasha went to University of Michigan and transferred to University of Southern California her senior year. They used to go to the school I taught in before moving to DC. Usually, Harvard only took 2 students from our school. Same with Yale. For this graduating class I only know of one child who is going, since they no longer publish the names and schools that people are going to. The boy I know of, is going to Harvard and Boston School of Music at the same time. In Germany they used to ask where your parents went to university too, but they no longer ask about parents. It would be different there though because it is very common just to go to the university in your home town if there is one, or one of the ones in your state. If one can live at home one has saved money. German students do not pay tuition and they typically come out of university without debt. There is no legacy admission, and if you apply for a subject for which they will have a lot of places, and they have no special requirements for admission, like passing a proficiency test, then they typically let you know that you are guaranteed a spot.
I will be writing about the German admissions process as soon as my daughter and her friend (who is not a dual citizen) are done and get in somewhere. This summer is the time to apply for German Universities because they are not going to admit you until they see your final transcripts. When my husband heard that all of their other classmates already knew where they were accepted and decided where to go by May, he asked, "how can they know if they accept them before they have even graduated?" I responded by telling him it is a conditional acceptance, and could always be withdrawn if things change. I am sure it is necessary for making housing decisions, since most USA universities force one to live on campus in the freshman year they have to have time to arrange housing. In Germany, I think some universities might guarantee foreign students a place in a dorm, but in general, one has to start looking for housing on one's own. You might get into a dorm, which means you will have your own bedroom, even if you share a dorm suite with others, or a house. That is a common thing, people apply to join cooperative houses, or apartments. Still, these housing costs are typically low compared to American dorms. Luckily my daughter does not care where she goes in Germany for the first year, which is college prep program for anyone who does not have an Abitur, or at least subject 6 classes in German in an IB program. Same cost as the university and are part of a university in most states in Germany. She has known her whole life that she will get a good education wherever she goes in Germany. It would be good if most American students felt that way, because they would probably be taking on less debt, and looking for cost effectiveness and accessibility as priorities.
I haven't kept up with the details of the Obama kids' lives. How do you know Malia got in as a legacy and not as someone who actually qualified? Surely you can't say that universities should REJECT the children of alums simply because of the connection? That's too PC for even this 79 year liberal.
Did not mean to imply that she got in as a legacy, just that she is a Harvard legacy, and as such should get the same treatment as everyone else when it comes to admissions.
Isn't the Louisiana law school that taught the Nazi lawyers the Jim Crow laws? I' m not home to look raid up in Isabelle Wilkinsons "Caste"? I think writing letters to bar associations is an interesting idea
Just when I am most tempted to put my head in the sand (i.e., this morning), your column strengthens my neck and allows me to begin my day with hope amid thoughtful people. As always, thank you.
Robert, your question about religious participation is interesting.
"Is the phenomenon of increasing secularism—or decreasing participation in organized religion—a good thing or a bad thing for American culture?"
It would be a bad thing if churches and other places of worship represented what they were intended to represent. Things like the Golden Rule, offering shelter to the stranger, feeding the poor, helping a neighbor in need. For sure, there are a few religious organizations that actually do that stuff.
But what do Gen Y and Z see in terms of organized religion? A Catholic church rotting from within - failing to address their own abuse of children. A large part of the Protestant church that preaches hate and bigotry. A portion of the Jewish faith that treats Palestinians as subhuman. An Islam that bombs innocents.
Obviously, there are large numbers of folks who belong to the above faiths who try to live the way their founders had intended. But "organized religion" is now seen by many as the source of wars and horrific persecution. Based on that, I would ask: Is it any surprise that people are fleeing institutions that promote the very antithesis of their founding principles?
Leaving a club that teaches evil seems like a sensible idea to me. So my answer is that it is a very good thing that people are rejecting organizations that don't live out their own original teachings. Young people are liberating themselves. The question is what structure or philosophy or rule book do they adopt next? Personally, I am fine with values instilled in me by my parents. But for those who want or need an organization to help, Humanism can't be beat.
I believe most hardcore fundamentalists and others don’t realize that they are embracing a myth when they wrapped themselves in most religious dogma. That being said, it appears to me that religion has served many by providing a community of fellowship more so than a hijacked faithful who track with the obscene abuse of power and Biblical cherry picking to serve their “mostly male” dictates from the pulpit.
There was a time when churches were indeed centers of social gravity. One could be sitting next to someone from a different political party and yet share the same concerns for the family in front of you whose house just burned down. Community, concern, and a collective sense of caring for each other. I don't demean that. That's what life should be like.
Wouldn't it be nice if some preachers would step back from their political soap boxes and lead a group to help instead of demonizing? The Evangelicals have gone retrograde and sound like the maniacal "fire and brimstone" preachers of the past.
My take? As soon as a religion says that it is the only and best one...that other faiths are lesser...it's time to move on. There are over 4000 religions in the world. 80% of us belong to one of 12 faiths. For an Evangelical to claim that their values should reign supreme over all the others is just another form of tribalism and fascism. For a display of similar arrogance, just look at the Opus Dei driven Supreme Court.
Bill, there have been several stories/reports of preachers speaking out to their congregations only to be chased out of town. I’m traveling and won’t take the time to search now, but both NPR and NY Times have carried these stories. How sad is that?
With the fundamentalist saying “Jesus is the way, the only way” they discount a lot of people on this earth. As you noted, that is the most arrogant outlook any religion could offer.
I feel exactly the same way. I was raised Lutheran in a mild-mannered way, but Humanism is a better fit for my values at this time. People can probably make a religion out off popcorn if they wanted to. Thinking through and living your values ( like governing) is hard work.
Robert Hubbell, your expertise in legal matters is of great benefit to readers/listeners.
Now that the current SCOTUS decisions have again hacked away at Constitutional freedoms, lived realities, and the will of the people, your newsletter is even more "required reading."
But PLEASE hurry back to your recorded reading. Your calm delivery and perspectives are needed.
When I read issues like these, judges blocking needed attention and action based on partisan activism from the bench, cherry-picked in certain locations (that somehow seem to end up in the South, no surprise) it raises my blood pressure in "hair on fire" alarm. Hearing your voice would help me listen not only to the particulars of what is occurring, but await your perspective on paths forward to remedy these situations.
The "fine people on both sides" claims and conservative grievances about being censored do not pass "the smell test." May the desertion from MAGA- NAZI extremism continue and the cult base shrink and be repudiated for what they truly represent. May the people continue to fight back against voter suppression and FOR state Constitutional amendments that prevent the power-grabbing minority rule that reduces women in particular to second-class personhood under the oppression of an American form of theocracy akin to the Taliban.
Here's to continuing and increasing education and facts, and less ignorance and subjugation.
Here's to the old-fashioned "boring" government that works on REAL NEEDS
(instead of the anger, fear and hatred being peddled by the insurrectionists.)
- My incomplete list includes:
*coordination with social media to identify and combat misinformation and national security threats,
*building the economy from the middle out and bottom up (instead of siphoning wealth upward to the 1%)
*reviving businesses and supply chains with a vision to future jobs and innovation
*handling crumbling infrastructure needs
*expanding broadband access to the Internet
and
*addressing public health needs
- that includes access, options, privacy, medications, reducing disparities, protecting from epidemics, addressing gun violence, addiction care instead of criminalization, identifying prevention measures & enacting a wellness rather than sickness model, and reforming costs so families do not go bankrupt when illness occurs.
Thanks for your comment. I will resume reading tonight. I returned home at about 9 PM from Boston (to LA), so had little time to publish the newsletter.
Republican AGs file lawsuit to enable Facebook to spread COVID disinformation without any federal oversight. How many people have died from COVID in their states? When does politics overtake responsibility to voters? How does Facebook have so much influence with Republicans? Check this relationship map.
Thanks for that great distinction between "case and controversy" and standing. I knew there was one, but couldn't drag my memories of Civ Pro out of the former millennium
I never thought I'd say this, but I rather hope that if a serious bout of misinformation comes winging towards the country, the government will just say "I bite my thumb at you, judge" and warn social media of what to look out for. How can there be a rule of law when judges ignore the rules?
It has occurred to me that 2nd Amendment fanaticism has tainted the conservative view of the First Amendment. The First has always been filled with well established exceptions and the courts take a balancing approach in knotty cases between the rights and the needs of the country to maintain order. The 2d has become, for so many conservatives, written in stone with diamond rigidity. I've never really figured out why the 2d is so sacrosanct,** though I suspect it is mostly a matter of NRA propaganda-money talks. And this attitude seems to be attacking the long standing reasonable approach to the First, such that Extremes might well decide it is OK to shout fire in a crowded theater so long as one person has decided that the movie playing is grooming someone.
All through 2015 and 16 I was moaning "the court, the court." So few understood the danger. Now the theater actually is on fire, and no one seems to know how to man the hoses.
Because of all the discussion yesterday about the Rogue Six of our Supreme Court Justices, I came to what I think is a profound notion that I want to bounce off of you all. I may post again about it on Saturday, when life is more leisurely. But here goes. I have grown accustomed to realizing that it's what we can't see that is most likely to injure us, ala the movies Predator, The Thing, Blood Simple. In this case it's the Federalist Society, no doubt actively influential in the American Bar Association. Think about it: the Federalist Society is an organization of non-elected persons, undoubtedly backed by dark money, which influences political agendas. The Federalist Society got a huge boost when Trump was elected in 2016 and was undeniably instrumental in picking most of the Rogue Six, aided by the surprising and untimely passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The Federalist Society stepped into a place of power and has exercised its influence to achieve the goals of dark money that works unseen to change the rule of law in this country. Expanding the SCOTUS could well be a useless act unless we fix the way our legal system operates because the ABA and other power sources have corrupted it, perhaps unwittingly, but it doesn't matter. I have been deeply studying the legal profession and the statistics of unwellness in the rank-and-file of practicing lawyers reflects a sick institution that I now see is responsible for the degradation of the principles that form the basis of the law that we learn in law school - a degradation that is being shaped by the hands of Justices (and, I am sure judges) selected by the Federalist Society. When did they get such power? We are f*cked unless we figure this out real quick. The camel got into the tent while we weren't looking.
"The phenomenon is yet another consequence of John Roberts exercising his leadership as Chief Justice of the United States of America. "
uh, when did he ever show one scintilla of leadership??
If we have any reason to be hopeful (but not complacent) it's that these outrages will finally wake up enough Americans to corral these rogues, throw out the crooks, and re-establish a functioning democracy. It's going to require everyone doing everything they can, no kid gloves, no time to waste.
We knew that Trump-appointed judges could do great harm to the laws of the land. And Judge Doughty's ruIing is truly harmful. But you constantly note that we can be hopeful but not complacent. We can slowly and consistently chip away at the poor decisions/plans of the Republican minority. I appreciated your call to action on Independence Day, “What are we willing to do now?”. The simple answer for right now: engage with the Ohio August 8 election to GOTV. The Movement Voter Project (movement.vote) is directing people to https://votenoinaugust.org/, from ONE PERSON=ONE VOTE and posted information in a blog back in May - https://movement.vote/an-existential-moment-for-ohio/. It is critical to show Republican legislatures and judges that are playing fast and loose with the basic tenets of our democracy that We the People will defeat them.
Pinning to the top.
Betsy, like you, I was taken aback by Robert’s post title and commentary today, “Judges Gone Wild.” OMG!! It reinforces my appreciation of how much damage the former guy did in just four years along with right wing media. (I like to include “ring wing media” because somewhere along our journey they must be held accountable.) But that’s another call to action.
For now, I got some postcards written for the Ohio August vote prior to leaving the country. We have much to do but I reiterate Robert’s reference to Rebecca Solnit: “...we must fight back.”
Our country has a lot of history that we need to defend AND a lot of history we have been come to recognize we must make. There is no one who will come to our aid. As Joyce Vance writes in her sign off, “we’re in this together.”
So a rogue MAGA judge at least temporarily puts a stop to efforts of the State Department, DOJ, and Homeland Security to meet with leading social media companies to discuss countermeasures to prevent foreign interference in the 2024 elections.
Just remember the efforts of Senator McConnell to do exactly the same in 2016
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/12/mitch-mcconnell-prevented-stronger-action-against-russian-election-meddling.html
and in 2019
https://www.vox.com/2019/5/21/18629428/election-security-mitch-mcconnell-donald-trump-russia
Obviously there is a pattern there. They have no shame. Years ago some participants at MAGA events showed up in t-shirts sporting the slogan 'Better Russian than Democrat'. Seems like they meant it.
I am more convinced than ever the Democrats have a communication problem. We have no firebrands who can put fire into facts. We have Silent Schumer and a House leader young enough to be a bur in MAGAS side but strangely quiet for his age. And of course our President, who is nothing if not a masterful politician, but a man of tepid tones. I think age sticks to Biden and not Trump because he is lukewarm and too sick cool (learned that term from my nephew). So how can we get a larger audience for firebrands such as you Robert who have the ability to convert cold facts into damning indictments (I would love to have seen you in a courtroom). Who would you recommend as fellow firebrands? I think of Jennifer Rubin, whose brilliance is only exceeded by her smoldering anger; AOC; and Sheldon Whitehouse; the Tennessee Three. By the way, what has happened to my senator, Elizabeth Warren? How can we galvanize the way the Tea Party did? Indivisible has the network across America but they seem to be resting on its laurels. How do we bring out people in a mass who can feed off each others burning hearts? We need to protest, protest, protest, making life uncomfortable for the next 16 months.
Hi, John. I can think of one firebrand who is a good communicator: You! Write letters to the editor, start a blog, join Threads (Instagram's challenger to Twitter) etc.
That is high raise considering it comes from you, who gives me hope and inspiration every day. I ain’t no Robert Hubbell though. I’ll see what my editor thinks!
Adam Schiff. Jamie Raskin. I think one of our congressmen, Jay Auchincloss, has potential. (Whereas the Kennedy he replaced did not.)
I don't know what happened to our Senator, Elizabeth Warren.
You make excellent points.
Jamie Raskin for sure!
Mark, I like the second half of your post because you are right to work to identify and promote those who can get the Dems message out. But, I ask that you and others please stop helping to other side’s narrative by opening the post with the negative take on Biden, Schumer or Hakeem Jeffries. They have contributed a lot and Biden, in particular, has been cited by many for his masterful handling of the State of the Union message and the phones budget crises.
We all have to pitch in to get the messaging out while recognizing everyone has played and will continue to give their best.
Katie porter. Maxwell frost. Beto o rourke. Bernie sanders.
Nicole Wallace, and most of her guests. Glenn kirschner esp
Steve Schmidt. Tara setmayer.
Eric Swalwell does a great job.
Very good points!
I recall that, not all that long ago, a conservative here remarked that Putin would be a better leader for this country than Biden. The same mentality wanted to see Lindbergh, instead of Roosevelt; McClellan, instead of Lincoln. There will always be those who see the Earth as flat and the epidermis, or gender, of a person as proof of superiority. Such people are destined for the dust bin.
Thanks for the links. Hence, the well earned moniker for MAGA leader Moscow Mitch.
Absolutely! Never forget what McConnell did in 2016. And always remember that McConnell was a major player who brought Citizens United back from the dead after it had been stopped at the appeals court level. He was a co-plaintiff who resurrected the case. And ever since he has gathered up huge sums of money to aid Republicans in their elections, most notably Susan Collins.
We must doggedly expose and depose McConnell. He is long overdue to be put out to pasture like a lot of the Kentucky thoroughbreds who have managed to survive Churchill Downs.
This is so crazy. It is the flip side of the 60’s. Better Red than Dead. Do these guys have a clue? They are so brainwashed that they would take the gulag over democracy? Ignorance is anything but bliss.
Robert, I wouldn't claim to understand the legalities of the rulings you reported on tonight. However, based on the wild and alarming pronouncements of a couple of misguided (at best) judges, I can only say that it's a good thing you took a few days off in the past week or so. I sense that you're going to need all your strength, energy and patience to continue the good fight to help defeat the measures you described in tonight's report. You will surely have the company of numerous scholars as allies.
I’ve got a couple of questions. First, how did Trump select people to appoint to the various courts? Second, how did Lori Smith, a person with no actual business and no actual gay potential clients come to file a suit? I suppose I’m asking has anyone followed the money to see who was bankrolling all of this and equally important, what are their motivations? These people are the true “deep state”, Trump, McConnell, et al, are the puppets. The folks behind the curtain need to be exposed and talked about every single day.
I believe she was recruited by a right-wing activist organization that files "test" cases advancing the conservative agenda.
I hope investigative reporters (Maddow, NYT, WAPO) are working on exposing who exactly are the people dumping millions into these cases: name names, expose the agendas, take off the hoods.
Leonard Leo.
Judge Doughty and the majority of the Fifth Circuit are interesting (and horrifying) examples of how a little knowledge is a lot worse than a lot of knowledge if you're going to serve in the Judiciary. And it's proof positive, if anymore were needed, that Leonard Leo and Mitch McConnell had only their partisan interests at heart and were not deeply interested in intellect or qualifications. We're all worse off for that. -------> Proving, if anyone needed proof, that money has to be wrung out of our politics. Over-writing Citizens United would be a good first step.
As someone with a law degree, licensed to practice in two states even though not a practicing lawyer, I find it really hard to believe that these judges ever legitimately even passed the bar exam. It is really a shame the extent to which almost all of our true professions, like medicine, law, and accounting to name a few, have allowed themselves to sink to such lack of standards, self-regulation and self-policing.
The whole purpose of having professions and enabling them the right to set standards and to control licensure is that they are to enforce relatively high basic standards of knowledge, proficiency, and ethics. The failure of the professions to do this has meant that they have been essentially taken over by industries (like managed care in medicine and mega consulting firms in accounting), or they have been eclipsed in influence by private organizations (like the Federalist Society) and have ceased enforcement around all but the most egregious ethical and proficiency failures. It’s a shame and it’s another indication of the need for reassessment and revival of basic principles of personal and professional integrity and the idea of service in the public interest.
Hi, Jon. Thanks for your comment, and good to meet you at the Boston reader meeting!
Well said.
I really feel that the Law schools these justices attended should revoke their diplomas and the legal associations in charge of continuing accreditation of lawyers, should disbar them. That would immediately disqualify them from sitting on the bench. I also think that these corrupt justices are in many cases indicative of what is wrong with legacy admissions, as well as buying your way in. Coney Barrett is the only one on the current Supreme Court who went to Notre Dame instead of Harvard or Yale for law school. Their programs are all suspect to me. What were they teaching? How do they confer degrees on so many people who turn out to be crooks. Perhaps we should all be writing letters to the American and other Bar Associations and asking that they disbar these people. Judge Terry Dougherty went to Louisiana State Law School. They are missing an ethics course or two and a process for screening out men with neanderthal mentalities. Judge Reed O'Conner went to Southern Texas College of Law. Again these schools all need ethics courses.
As far as I know every state bar exam has an ethics section. Loads of questions about what you can and can't do with the retainer funds deposited in the trust account. There is a rule pretty much everyone knows about not lying to the court. However, once one IS the court, lying appears to be A-OK nowadays.
I'm not a Harvard grad, but do remember that the Obamas went there too. I don't really know if legacy admissions apply to law school, but if they do you may be on to something regarding quality for some folks. I will say that in my years of practice I often encountered other lawyers who were very, very dumb.
I wouldn't approve of Malia Obama getting in to Harvard as a legacy either. I hope she didn't. I assume most universities want to accept a president's daughters though. Her sister Sasha went to University of Michigan and transferred to University of Southern California her senior year. They used to go to the school I taught in before moving to DC. Usually, Harvard only took 2 students from our school. Same with Yale. For this graduating class I only know of one child who is going, since they no longer publish the names and schools that people are going to. The boy I know of, is going to Harvard and Boston School of Music at the same time. In Germany they used to ask where your parents went to university too, but they no longer ask about parents. It would be different there though because it is very common just to go to the university in your home town if there is one, or one of the ones in your state. If one can live at home one has saved money. German students do not pay tuition and they typically come out of university without debt. There is no legacy admission, and if you apply for a subject for which they will have a lot of places, and they have no special requirements for admission, like passing a proficiency test, then they typically let you know that you are guaranteed a spot.
Very interesting to look at different educational systems. Ours can use some help right now.
I will be writing about the German admissions process as soon as my daughter and her friend (who is not a dual citizen) are done and get in somewhere. This summer is the time to apply for German Universities because they are not going to admit you until they see your final transcripts. When my husband heard that all of their other classmates already knew where they were accepted and decided where to go by May, he asked, "how can they know if they accept them before they have even graduated?" I responded by telling him it is a conditional acceptance, and could always be withdrawn if things change. I am sure it is necessary for making housing decisions, since most USA universities force one to live on campus in the freshman year they have to have time to arrange housing. In Germany, I think some universities might guarantee foreign students a place in a dorm, but in general, one has to start looking for housing on one's own. You might get into a dorm, which means you will have your own bedroom, even if you share a dorm suite with others, or a house. That is a common thing, people apply to join cooperative houses, or apartments. Still, these housing costs are typically low compared to American dorms. Luckily my daughter does not care where she goes in Germany for the first year, which is college prep program for anyone who does not have an Abitur, or at least subject 6 classes in German in an IB program. Same cost as the university and are part of a university in most states in Germany. She has known her whole life that she will get a good education wherever she goes in Germany. It would be good if most American students felt that way, because they would probably be taking on less debt, and looking for cost effectiveness and accessibility as priorities.
I haven't kept up with the details of the Obama kids' lives. How do you know Malia got in as a legacy and not as someone who actually qualified? Surely you can't say that universities should REJECT the children of alums simply because of the connection? That's too PC for even this 79 year liberal.
Did not mean to imply that she got in as a legacy, just that she is a Harvard legacy, and as such should get the same treatment as everyone else when it comes to admissions.
Isn't the Louisiana law school that taught the Nazi lawyers the Jim Crow laws? I' m not home to look raid up in Isabelle Wilkinsons "Caste"? I think writing letters to bar associations is an interesting idea
Dear Robert,
Just when I am most tempted to put my head in the sand (i.e., this morning), your column strengthens my neck and allows me to begin my day with hope amid thoughtful people. As always, thank you.
Robert, your question about religious participation is interesting.
"Is the phenomenon of increasing secularism—or decreasing participation in organized religion—a good thing or a bad thing for American culture?"
It would be a bad thing if churches and other places of worship represented what they were intended to represent. Things like the Golden Rule, offering shelter to the stranger, feeding the poor, helping a neighbor in need. For sure, there are a few religious organizations that actually do that stuff.
But what do Gen Y and Z see in terms of organized religion? A Catholic church rotting from within - failing to address their own abuse of children. A large part of the Protestant church that preaches hate and bigotry. A portion of the Jewish faith that treats Palestinians as subhuman. An Islam that bombs innocents.
Obviously, there are large numbers of folks who belong to the above faiths who try to live the way their founders had intended. But "organized religion" is now seen by many as the source of wars and horrific persecution. Based on that, I would ask: Is it any surprise that people are fleeing institutions that promote the very antithesis of their founding principles?
Leaving a club that teaches evil seems like a sensible idea to me. So my answer is that it is a very good thing that people are rejecting organizations that don't live out their own original teachings. Young people are liberating themselves. The question is what structure or philosophy or rule book do they adopt next? Personally, I am fine with values instilled in me by my parents. But for those who want or need an organization to help, Humanism can't be beat.
I believe most hardcore fundamentalists and others don’t realize that they are embracing a myth when they wrapped themselves in most religious dogma. That being said, it appears to me that religion has served many by providing a community of fellowship more so than a hijacked faithful who track with the obscene abuse of power and Biblical cherry picking to serve their “mostly male” dictates from the pulpit.
There was a time when churches were indeed centers of social gravity. One could be sitting next to someone from a different political party and yet share the same concerns for the family in front of you whose house just burned down. Community, concern, and a collective sense of caring for each other. I don't demean that. That's what life should be like.
Wouldn't it be nice if some preachers would step back from their political soap boxes and lead a group to help instead of demonizing? The Evangelicals have gone retrograde and sound like the maniacal "fire and brimstone" preachers of the past.
My take? As soon as a religion says that it is the only and best one...that other faiths are lesser...it's time to move on. There are over 4000 religions in the world. 80% of us belong to one of 12 faiths. For an Evangelical to claim that their values should reign supreme over all the others is just another form of tribalism and fascism. For a display of similar arrogance, just look at the Opus Dei driven Supreme Court.
Bill, there have been several stories/reports of preachers speaking out to their congregations only to be chased out of town. I’m traveling and won’t take the time to search now, but both NPR and NY Times have carried these stories. How sad is that?
With the fundamentalist saying “Jesus is the way, the only way” they discount a lot of people on this earth. As you noted, that is the most arrogant outlook any religion could offer.
I feel exactly the same way. I was raised Lutheran in a mild-mannered way, but Humanism is a better fit for my values at this time. People can probably make a religion out off popcorn if they wanted to. Thinking through and living your values ( like governing) is hard work.
I needed every letter of your hopeful message today. Corruption in the courts is most dispiriting of all traces of the authoritarian GOP regime.
Same here.
Robert Hubbell, your expertise in legal matters is of great benefit to readers/listeners.
Now that the current SCOTUS decisions have again hacked away at Constitutional freedoms, lived realities, and the will of the people, your newsletter is even more "required reading."
But PLEASE hurry back to your recorded reading. Your calm delivery and perspectives are needed.
When I read issues like these, judges blocking needed attention and action based on partisan activism from the bench, cherry-picked in certain locations (that somehow seem to end up in the South, no surprise) it raises my blood pressure in "hair on fire" alarm. Hearing your voice would help me listen not only to the particulars of what is occurring, but await your perspective on paths forward to remedy these situations.
The "fine people on both sides" claims and conservative grievances about being censored do not pass "the smell test." May the desertion from MAGA- NAZI extremism continue and the cult base shrink and be repudiated for what they truly represent. May the people continue to fight back against voter suppression and FOR state Constitutional amendments that prevent the power-grabbing minority rule that reduces women in particular to second-class personhood under the oppression of an American form of theocracy akin to the Taliban.
Here's to continuing and increasing education and facts, and less ignorance and subjugation.
Here's to the old-fashioned "boring" government that works on REAL NEEDS
(instead of the anger, fear and hatred being peddled by the insurrectionists.)
- My incomplete list includes:
*coordination with social media to identify and combat misinformation and national security threats,
*building the economy from the middle out and bottom up (instead of siphoning wealth upward to the 1%)
*reviving businesses and supply chains with a vision to future jobs and innovation
*handling crumbling infrastructure needs
*expanding broadband access to the Internet
and
*addressing public health needs
- that includes access, options, privacy, medications, reducing disparities, protecting from epidemics, addressing gun violence, addiction care instead of criminalization, identifying prevention measures & enacting a wellness rather than sickness model, and reforming costs so families do not go bankrupt when illness occurs.
Thanks for your comment. I will resume reading tonight. I returned home at about 9 PM from Boston (to LA), so had little time to publish the newsletter.
If we lose standing, we are well and truly fucked Doughty (and other judges) 'oughty' be impeached immediately.
Republican AGs file lawsuit to enable Facebook to spread COVID disinformation without any federal oversight. How many people have died from COVID in their states? When does politics overtake responsibility to voters? How does Facebook have so much influence with Republicans? Check this relationship map.
https://thedemlabs.org/2023/07/05/judge-limits-biden-administration-facebook-contact-to-curb-covid-disinfo/
thanks for the link to the relationship map.
Glad you liked it. Let me know if you ever need a graphic/map to accompany one of your blogs and I'd be glad to help pro bono.
Thanks for that great distinction between "case and controversy" and standing. I knew there was one, but couldn't drag my memories of Civ Pro out of the former millennium
I never thought I'd say this, but I rather hope that if a serious bout of misinformation comes winging towards the country, the government will just say "I bite my thumb at you, judge" and warn social media of what to look out for. How can there be a rule of law when judges ignore the rules?
It has occurred to me that 2nd Amendment fanaticism has tainted the conservative view of the First Amendment. The First has always been filled with well established exceptions and the courts take a balancing approach in knotty cases between the rights and the needs of the country to maintain order. The 2d has become, for so many conservatives, written in stone with diamond rigidity. I've never really figured out why the 2d is so sacrosanct,** though I suspect it is mostly a matter of NRA propaganda-money talks. And this attitude seems to be attacking the long standing reasonable approach to the First, such that Extremes might well decide it is OK to shout fire in a crowded theater so long as one person has decided that the movie playing is grooming someone.
All through 2015 and 16 I was moaning "the court, the court." So few understood the danger. Now the theater actually is on fire, and no one seems to know how to man the hoses.
__________________________________________________________
**apart, of course, from Scalia deciding that the opening clause didn't apply.
Because of all the discussion yesterday about the Rogue Six of our Supreme Court Justices, I came to what I think is a profound notion that I want to bounce off of you all. I may post again about it on Saturday, when life is more leisurely. But here goes. I have grown accustomed to realizing that it's what we can't see that is most likely to injure us, ala the movies Predator, The Thing, Blood Simple. In this case it's the Federalist Society, no doubt actively influential in the American Bar Association. Think about it: the Federalist Society is an organization of non-elected persons, undoubtedly backed by dark money, which influences political agendas. The Federalist Society got a huge boost when Trump was elected in 2016 and was undeniably instrumental in picking most of the Rogue Six, aided by the surprising and untimely passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The Federalist Society stepped into a place of power and has exercised its influence to achieve the goals of dark money that works unseen to change the rule of law in this country. Expanding the SCOTUS could well be a useless act unless we fix the way our legal system operates because the ABA and other power sources have corrupted it, perhaps unwittingly, but it doesn't matter. I have been deeply studying the legal profession and the statistics of unwellness in the rank-and-file of practicing lawyers reflects a sick institution that I now see is responsible for the degradation of the principles that form the basis of the law that we learn in law school - a degradation that is being shaped by the hands of Justices (and, I am sure judges) selected by the Federalist Society. When did they get such power? We are f*cked unless we figure this out real quick. The camel got into the tent while we weren't looking.
Democracy In Chains was my introduction to the money in the Federalist Society.
Was that an article?
It's a book by Nancy MacLean
I will check it out. Thank you!!!
"The phenomenon is yet another consequence of John Roberts exercising his leadership as Chief Justice of the United States of America. "
uh, when did he ever show one scintilla of leadership??
If we have any reason to be hopeful (but not complacent) it's that these outrages will finally wake up enough Americans to corral these rogues, throw out the crooks, and re-establish a functioning democracy. It's going to require everyone doing everything they can, no kid gloves, no time to waste.
I meant to write "failing" to exercise his leadership. But it still works without the qualifier. His leadership is a disaster.