pols & judges: the roles are different, Lisa
Lisa Stone recently reminded us that she’s “no attorney.” But,
she certainly does cyber-hang with a lot of them at the Law.com
Weblog Network. Would one of them please explain to her why
a judge
just might — appropriately — have a different opinion
on an issue [or the outcome of the judicial or legislative
process relating to that issue] than he or she has as a
private citizen or as
a politician “Vote neg” .
Therefore, despite Lisa’s post today, we cannot and should
not know how Harriet Miers would vote when presented with
abortion-related issues, simply by knowing her stance as a
politician in 1989. (See, e.g., A Matter of Interpretation, by
Antonin Scalia, 1987; cf., The Federalist Papers.)
update (9:30 PM): Lisa has added this to her post, in response
to my above complaint:
“Updated graph: Sorry, but I think the selling of this
particular candidate in the past week–both over and
under-the-counter–makes this appropriate distinction
of roles (so appropriate-sounding with the nomination
of Roberts, who worked for Reagan and then served
as a judge) sound disingenuous where Miers is concerned. ”
I just emailed Lisa, saying that making the distinction is the only
appropriate reply that the White House or any other interested
parties should be making, and adding: “We shouldn’t expect a direct
answer to the abortion question, even at the nomination hearings.
Your take on this in today’s post sounds more like a journalist trying
to create a controversy than one trying to help explain an important
public issue.”
update (Oct. 19, 2005): Steve Bainbridge made my point nicely
today, in a post titled “Will She or Won’t She?“:
“I start with the hope that Miers’ 1989 statement does not
tell us how she will rule. In my book (or, more precisely,
my article), judges are not supposed to decide cases
based on personal political policy preferences. They are
supposed to try to figure out what the law is, which in the
case of Roe means looking at the text of the Constitution,
the intent of the framers, and the traditions of our country
(i.e., originalism, textualism, and traditionalism). One thus
can readily imagine a judge who would vote to support a
state ban on abortions and then turn around and, in his
capacity as a judge, strike that very same law down because
the judge believes stare decisis requires him or her to adhere
to Roe.”
by dagosan:
running for judge —
she practices
her braille
[Oct. 18, 2005]
Comments Off
I just saw the tagline on the masthead of the 
Therefore, instead of worrying about cronies and quotas, 
“Throughout my hurricane exile, the kind support from friends, 
Here are a few of the fine haiku and senryu that you will find in 
lanoue/chiara