09 February 2008

It's A Beautiful Saturday Afternoon...

....and we hope you're not indoors like we've been, but outside enjoying some sort of athletic activity.

So, with spring in the air, we're thinking about baseball, and fantasy baseball. Email us if you're interested in joining our official, OL&L Fantasy Baseball League. Who knows, Morgan, maybe you'd find you liked baseball?


They linked to us, we'll link to them:

BYU Weekly (see "Faces of BYU")


We just finished transcribing our interview with Brian Jones of Mercury Public Affairs, formerly John McCains Director of Communications, RNC Director of Communications, and lots of other really cool stuff. Our Bush-hating readers will be glad to know he helped the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2004.

Anyway, we got it typed up and are figuring out how to put it on the web. Stay tuned.


Thanks to everyone for their comments and the healthy discussion that has resulted here at OL&L. Don't burn all your good thoughts on one post--we need y'all for the long haul. So, post early, post often--even if it's just to say, "Jake, you're an idiot."


Regarding Spikers' point about the President's influence over social issues: agreed that he/she has very little personal influence over those issues. However, he or she will choose at least one Supreme Court Justice. It is highly likely that this new Justice will, along with the rest of the Supreme Court, rule on cases related to abortion, gay marriage, and less likely, stem cell research.

Furthermore, this new Justice will be either be constructionist in their judicial philosophy or activist. For these reasons, we want a Republican President committed to picking a judge like Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, John Roberts, and Samuel Alito.

The thought of having another David Souter makes us want to throw up.

If you have tips, questions, comments, suggestions, or requests for subscription only articles, email us at lybberty@gmail.com.


Spikers said...

It is true that the next President will likely appoint one, or more, Supreme Court justices to the bench. However, the President's ability to influence outcomes through judicial appointments is exaggerated.

The President cannot know beforehand how any judge will rule on any one issue before that issue is heard. Justice O'Conner is a prime example of how a supposedly "strict constructionist" took both conservative and liberal positions on social issues. If the President cannot know beforehand how a judge will decide these issues, how much influence can he really have?

Furthermore, all Supreme Court Justices must be confirmed by the Senate. While democrats control the Senate, any attempt to seat an openly conservative judge will likely be quashed during confirmation hearings.

Moreover, it is important the the President focus on the qualifications of judge, without receiving assurances regarding how a certain justice would decide certain issues. Our system depends on an independent judiciary to protect us from constitutional violations. Judicial independence is threatened by attempts obtain assurances regarding how potential questions would be decided in the future. In fact the Supreme Court is prohibited from offering Advisory Opinions to the legislature or executive branches. in Flast v. Cohen the Court wrote: " [T]he implicit policies embodied in Article III, and not history alone, impose the rule against advisory opinions. [The rule] implements the separation of powers [and] also recognizes that such suits often are not pressed before the Court with that clear concreteness provided when a question emerges precisely framed and necessary for decision from a clash of adversary argument exploring every aspect of a multifaceted situation embracing conflicting and demanding interest." The same reasoning applies with to judicial nominees.

I also take issue with the idea of activist judges. What exactly do you mean by "activist judges"? The idea that judges should interpret law, and not make it, is somewhat nonsensical. The United States inherited common law jurisprudence from the English. Under a common law system, law is created in two ways: 1) the legislature can pass statutory law and 2) judicial decisions automatically become law.

the wizard of libya said...

Jake, you're an idiot.

dmz said...

you stay classy, wizard of libya!

Morgan said...

the odds of me liking baseball are about as good as the odds of me enjoying a barbed wire enema. and that is a significant improvement from the pre-moneyball days. so good luck with convincing me to join the league you media whore (does that make me hip? it seems to be the popular way to address you these days)

MJ said...

jake, you're an idiot.

...great call on that rockin' video though!

MJ said...

oh, and David Souter has a mother too!