Jamesb101.com

commentary on Politics and a little bit of everything else

The Dog still thinks it’s gonna be Kagan for the Supreme’s job……

I mentioned this a while ago when the job hunt began……

I’m trying to repeat my good record in picking the last Supreme Court appointment of Justice Sotomayor……


From PoliticalWire……

Mike Allen: “Look for President Obama to name his Supreme Court pick Monday, and look for it to be Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a former Harvard Law dean. The pick isn’t official, but top White House aides will be shocked if it’s otherwise. Kagan’s relative youth (50) is a huge asset for the lifetime post. And President Obama considers her to be a persuasive, fearless advocate who would serve as an intellectual counterweight to Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, and could lure swing Justice Kennedy into some coalitions The West Wing may leak the pick to AP’s Ben Feller on the later side Sunday, then confirm it for others for morning editions.”

Another sign: Salon reports the White House is circulating pro-Kagan talking points.

May 7, 2010 Posted by | Blogs, Breaking News, Counterpoints, Government, Law, Media, Other Things, PoliticalDog Calls, Politics, Projections, Updates | , , | 3 Comments

The Dog still thinks it's gonna be Kagan for the Supreme's job……

I mentioned this a while ago when the job hunt began……

I’m trying to repeat my good record in picking the last Supreme Court appointment of Justice Sotomayor……


From PoliticalWire……

Mike Allen: “Look for President Obama to name his Supreme Court pick Monday, and look for it to be Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a former Harvard Law dean. The pick isn’t official, but top White House aides will be shocked if it’s otherwise. Kagan’s relative youth (50) is a huge asset for the lifetime post. And President Obama considers her to be a persuasive, fearless advocate who would serve as an intellectual counterweight to Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, and could lure swing Justice Kennedy into some coalitions The West Wing may leak the pick to AP’s Ben Feller on the later side Sunday, then confirm it for others for morning editions.”

Another sign: Salon reports the White House is circulating pro-Kagan talking points.

May 7, 2010 Posted by | Blogs, Breaking News, Counterpoints, Government, Law, Media, Other Things, PoliticalDog Calls, Politics, Projections, Updates | , , | 3 Comments

Dog fight video’s are protected by the First Amendment…..Supremes…..

If you believe in the First Amenedment…you gotta go with this…even if hurts……

Cruelty to Animals is still illegal…….

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority in the 8-to-1 decision, said that the law had created “a criminal prohibition of alarming breadth” and that the government’s aggressive defense of the law was “startling and dangerous.”

Tuesday’s decision arose from the prosecution of Robert J. Stevens, an author and small-time film producer who presented himself as an authority on pit bulls. He did not participate in dogfights, but he did compile and sell videotapes showing the fights, and he received a 37-month sentence under a 1999 federal law that banned trafficking in “depictions of animal cruelty.”

Dogfighting and other forms of animal cruelty have long been illegal in all 50 states. The 1999 law addressed not the underlying activity but rather trafficking in recordings of “conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded or killed.”

It did not matter whether the conduct was legal when and where it occurred so long as it would have been illegal where the recording was sold. Some of Mr. Stevens’s videos, for instance, showed dogfighting in Japan, where the practice is legal.

The government argued that depictions showing harm to animals were of such minimal social worth that they should receive no First Amendment protection at all. Chief Justice Roberts roundly rejected that assertion. “The First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter or its content,” he wrote.

The chief justice acknowledged that some kinds of speech — including obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement and speech integral to criminal conduct — have historically been granted no constitutional protection. But he said the Supreme Court had no “freewheeling authority to declare new categories of speech outside the scope of the First Amendment.”

Chief Justice Roberts rejected the government’s analogy to a more recent category of unprotected speech, child pornography, which the court in 1982 said deserved no First Amendment protection. Child pornography, the chief justice said, is “a special case” because the market for it is “intrinsically related to the underlying abuse.”

More……..

April 20, 2010 Posted by | Breaking News, Counterpoints, Crime, Government, Law, Media, Men, Other Things, PoliticalDog Calls, Sports, Updates, Women | , , | Leave a comment

Dog fight video's are protected by the First Amendment…..Supremes…..

If you believe in the First Amenedment…you gotta go with this…even if hurts……

Cruelty to Animals is still illegal…….

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority in the 8-to-1 decision, said that the law had created “a criminal prohibition of alarming breadth” and that the government’s aggressive defense of the law was “startling and dangerous.”

Tuesday’s decision arose from the prosecution of Robert J. Stevens, an author and small-time film producer who presented himself as an authority on pit bulls. He did not participate in dogfights, but he did compile and sell videotapes showing the fights, and he received a 37-month sentence under a 1999 federal law that banned trafficking in “depictions of animal cruelty.”

Dogfighting and other forms of animal cruelty have long been illegal in all 50 states. The 1999 law addressed not the underlying activity but rather trafficking in recordings of “conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded or killed.”

It did not matter whether the conduct was legal when and where it occurred so long as it would have been illegal where the recording was sold. Some of Mr. Stevens’s videos, for instance, showed dogfighting in Japan, where the practice is legal.

The government argued that depictions showing harm to animals were of such minimal social worth that they should receive no First Amendment protection at all. Chief Justice Roberts roundly rejected that assertion. “The First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter or its content,” he wrote.

The chief justice acknowledged that some kinds of speech — including obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement and speech integral to criminal conduct — have historically been granted no constitutional protection. But he said the Supreme Court had no “freewheeling authority to declare new categories of speech outside the scope of the First Amendment.”

Chief Justice Roberts rejected the government’s analogy to a more recent category of unprotected speech, child pornography, which the court in 1982 said deserved no First Amendment protection. Child pornography, the chief justice said, is “a special case” because the market for it is “intrinsically related to the underlying abuse.”

More……..

April 20, 2010 Posted by | Breaking News, Counterpoints, Crime, Government, Law, Media, Men, Other Things, PoliticalDog Calls, Sports, Updates, Women | , , | Leave a comment

Elena Kagan next Supreme?

[ The nation’s Slicitor General in this photo with AG Holder ]

Backrounder……

Two weeks ago, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a leading contender for appointment to the Supreme Court, presented her sixthargument there. She bantered easily with the justices, and she seemed to have a special rapport with Justice Antonin Scalia, at one point responding to a question from him with one of her own.

Justice Scalia’s reply suggested she had crossed a line. “Well, I’m not making the argument,” he said, declining to answer her question.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who has had some testy exchanges with Ms. Kagan over the last seven months, made the point more sharply.

“Usually we have the questions the other way,” he said.

“I apologize,” Ms. Kagan replied.

Ms. Kagan, a former dean of the Harvard Law School, has never served as judge and so has no paper trail of judicial opinions. Her academic writings are dense, technical and largely nonideological. But a look at her service as solicitor general, the federal government’s top appellate lawyer, provides unusually direct insights into how she would interact with her new colleagues were she appointed to the court.

Ms. Kagan appears popular with the justices, and they seem to appreciate her candor, quick mind and informal style. But she tangles regularly with Chief Justice Roberts, who has emerged as her primary antagonist, frequently criticizing her tactical decisions and trying to corner her at oral arguments. In February, for instance, at an argument about a law making it a crime to provide material support to terrorists, Chief Justice Roberts tussled with Ms. Kagan over what he called a shift in the government’s position.

“I looked at your briefs,” he said. “I didn’t see the argument we’ve spend a lot of time talking about, which is that the legitimate activities allow the illegitimate activities to take place.”

Ms. Kagan replied with a sort of apology. “If we didn’t emphasize it enough,” she said, “I will plead error.”

The concession was typical of Ms. Kagan, who has a brisk, businesslike style and is unwilling to be distracted by side issues that do not advance the government’s interests.

More……..

Hey, you don’t even have to be lawyer actually to serve on the court….

But the fact that she doesn’t have the judge experience is fine with me….

The Dog does not agree that the law is staid..and should be looked at in the context of when it was adopted….

This is 300 or so years later…things cahnge….

An so must the interpretation of the law….

The people who pass judgement are human…their own thought, ideologies, biases and yes politics shape their judgements……

So I really don’t care much for her procedural missteps that the author of the piece provides..the law clerks will take care of that……

But a good sharp mind…a unwillingness to let the other judges intimidate her…..is fine with me…..

April 15, 2010 Posted by | Blogs, Breaking News, Counterpoints, Government, Law, Media, PoliticalDog Calls, Politics, Projections, Updates, Women | , , , | 1 Comment

Possible Supreme Court choices……..

Well…… with Stevens signaling that he’s gone after the last day of the court’s spring session…. the White House will intensify it search for a suitable person for the bench….and someone that can get thru the White House vetting and the Congressional interview political circus …..

This from Nate Silver over @ FiveThirtyEight.……

The National Review’s Daniel Foster has an ordered list of what he considers to be the four most likely Supreme Court nominees, sorted “from left to lefter”. In that order, he lists Merrick Garland, Elena Kagan, Diane Wood, and Pamela Karlan.

[][][]

[ Garland, Kagan and Wood the top three on most of the lists*…..]
Most other people that I’ve read today seem to agree with that ordering — although many of them seem to consider Karlan less likely and not a part of the short-short list. I don’t know whether their characterizations of each candidate’s judicial philosophy is accurate or inaccurate — but it does seem to be the conventional wisdom.

Certainly, there are a few legal scholars and Supreme Court correspondents out there who are qualified to know in something approaching an absolutesense each of these people might preside. For the rest of us, however — and by “us”, I mean other people who cover politics for a living — we’re really just kind of winging it and our impressions of each candidate’s ideology will be formulated only in a relative sense.

Say that Obama wants to nominate Kagan, for instance. It would seem to do him a lot of good if the Beltway’s impression of the short list were…

Garland (moderate)
Kagan
Wood
Karlan
Sullivan
Koh (liberal)
More……..

Note…….Settle back and enjoy the ride folks…this will become the major story ONCE the president makes his choice known…..

The Dog is happy to remember making the Sotomayor choice early before the pick came out…..

Maybe I can get lucky again?

*…For the first short Bio’s from the Washington Post….. which has a bigger list……See here……

April 9, 2010 Posted by | Blogs, Breaking News, Government, Law, Media, Men, Other Things, PoliticalDog Calls, Politics, Projections, Updates, Women | , , | Leave a comment