Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Tribe: Judge Taylor's decision the right one

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 01:38 PM
Original message
Tribe: Judge Taylor's decision the right one
And apparently all the carping about her "style" is designed to mask that the decision will hold up on appeal. At least according to Laurence Tribe, who knows a thing or two about the law. Commentary by Glenn Greenwald with a link to Tribe's legal analysis of the decision:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/08/20/professo...

A federal district court this week ruled what has been evident for some time now that the President of the U.S. has been systematically breaking the law without any valid defense, and ruled further that his administration has been violating the constitutional rights of Americans. In response, most of the media and the "legal experts" they consult have been far more interested in pretentiously demeaning the quality of the Judges written opinion as though what matters is to have law professors snidely grade the Judges work than they are interested in the grave constitutional crisis our country faces as a result of a lawless presidency.

More at the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. Honored to K&R. Thanks for the link. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marie26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. I think it'll hold up
through the Supreme Court, assuming standing isn't a problem. It'd be interesting to see what Bush does if the SC rules against this program. They show no signs of stopping it now, and I think they'd actually defy the SC rather than end the surveillance program.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. Recommended and kicked.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. I hope Tribe is right and the decision is upheld.
If bush is given the OK on his claim that as CIC he can do whatever he wants, the US is finished as a democracy. It will take another revolution to win back our freedoms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. This is a damned good article.
I especially appreciate the competent deconstruction of Arlen the Spectre,
"and when the lawmakers who are posturing as the programs critics have in fact engineered a statutory "fix" that amounts to little more than a whitewash in the offing "

When the best coverage the alleged news brokers can arrange is a bleating herd of punditry aristocracy who choose to attack the messenger (again) in the form of Diggs-Taylor, it certainly informs us as to what side of the question they automatically orient toward.

The damage arises, to me, from the choice that the vice-presidents men made to pursue their own agenda in the face of an obvious constitutional question. The unwillingness of the administration to bring their challenge to the attention of congress or the scotus, prior to taking the actions they have, tells me they knew full well the shakiness of their premise.

These crooks have to be held accountable and they have to face prosecution and punishment, if for no other reason than to give future presidents pause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
6. constitutional analysis by the Corp Media--surely, you jest--instead CNN
feeds up some partisanship by TOBIN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Not to mention the self-appointed "experts"
And there are a couple running around even here at DU, highly concerned about Judge Taylor's "sloppy" writing (thankfully their analyses are uniformly example free) and how that's going to doom this decision to being overturned. In reading the opinion, I found the framing of the questions before the court was rather "sloppy," which makes the decision all that harder to write.

Whether the writer is a judge or an appellate attorney, it's difficult to write an effective opinion or brief when dealing with a poor set of pleadings or brief in the first place. A lot of your writing (and attorneys are under strict page limits on their briefs) is spent on "Respondent said blah, blah, blah, which doesn't address the issues at hand in this case." Then comes three pages of why your adversary is off base. Then a page spent saying what your adversary more properly should have said. Then comes the rebuttal, and you've already spent four or five pages of a 20-page limit just getting one issue properly framed. When there are multiple issues, as there were in this case, it's very difficult to be brief in the brief, if you catch my meaning.

Likewise, a judge has to explain why a party's lame argument is lame, restate the argument as it should have been made in the first place, then explain why it's still no good. While judges don't labor under the same page restrictions that attorneys do, it's still difficult to sound coherent when the substantive portion of an opinion comes only after eight pages of getting the table properly set for the centerpiece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-21-06 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
8. Gee, where'd all the legal experts go?
We were chock full of them over the weekend . . .

Nobody wants to argue with Laurence Tribe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 19th 2014, 12:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC