tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post1390631716783834816..comments2024-03-19T03:14:04.172-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: The abortion law/environmental law connectionEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-13771753688744998052018-10-06T11:43:26.016-04:002018-10-06T11:43:26.016-04:00There is also an analogy to how scientists are for...There is also an analogy to how scientists are forced to wait years, decades, or beyond to validate results of their predictive models. This is in the absence of controlled experiments, which can't be performed for climate or astronomy studies. <br /><br />If there is any chance to cross-validate their models with data from TODAY, they will. There is no reason to wait for years and find out that the model is wrong.<br /><br />What we should do with Kavanaugh is essentially cross-validation with his previous rulings. We cannot afford to wait for decades to find out what kind of mess he will get us into.@whuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18297101284358849575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-57892200640902933122018-10-03T12:04:08.956-04:002018-10-03T12:04:08.956-04:00And the term limits for the real powers in Washing...And the term limits for the real powers in Washington, the lobbyists?Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567197089095711546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-69082523965274031512018-10-03T05:48:19.636-04:002018-10-03T05:48:19.636-04:00Barton, the US Constitution has a clear weakness i...Barton, the US Constitution has a clear weakness if the number of Supreme Court justices can be altered by those seeking political advantages. I would pass a constitutional amendment setting out the number of judges, the number of judges a president can nominate with a 51% majority of the Senate to no more than two, After the first two any additional nominees would require a 60% vote. While I'm at it I would set a 12 year term limit for judges who obtain less than 60% vote, and 24 years for those who get more than 60%. I would also limit senators to 18 years, congressmen to 12 years.Fernando Leanmehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16085680730729620836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-58995268203564966062018-10-02T12:38:04.211-04:002018-10-02T12:38:04.211-04:00FL: Stuffing the supreme with ADDITIONAL friendly...FL: Stuffing the supreme with ADDITIONAL friendly judges sure sounds like a Chavez move. <br /><br />BPL: Or an FDR move, if you know your US history. But I imagine you think FDR equivalent to Chavez.Barton Paul Levensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07630802738456749652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-16689570547881514712018-10-02T08:38:53.712-04:002018-10-02T08:38:53.712-04:00Hi Fernando, how are you these days?
Well, Venezu...Hi Fernando, how are you these days?<br /><br />Well, Venezuela may have adopted the idea of flexibility regarding the number of high court justices from the US. We have changed the number of sitting justices 6 times over the years...Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-83115755820493339052018-10-02T01:13:22.921-04:002018-10-02T01:13:22.921-04:00"Also, are you sure that it is always the &qu..."Also, are you sure that it is always the "adminstrative technical experts" who do the interpreting, unswayed by politics, their superiors, or special interests in any way?"<br /><br />No, they'd be swayed too, but at least they'd understand how the law affects the technical issues it's meant to affect.<br /><br />"You're not suggesting that Chevron comes into RvW, are you?"<br /><br />Not directly, but as a model blueprint of how they would gradually prune back RvW.Brian Schmidthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172685194686202391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-19877834729040054332018-10-01T18:35:06.552-04:002018-10-01T18:35:06.552-04:00So how is Brexit going?So how is Brexit going?Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07567197089095711546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-38025634706553001082018-10-01T13:25:56.340-04:002018-10-01T13:25:56.340-04:00Barton, the constitutional amendment sounds fine. ...Barton, the constitutional amendment sounds fine. Stuffing the supreme with ADDITIONAL friendly judges sure sounds like a Chavez move. Fernando Leanmehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16085680730729620836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-88345361328157246062018-10-01T12:12:50.364-04:002018-10-01T12:12:50.364-04:00Fernando, not all constitutional changes are Venez...Fernando, not all constitutional changes are Venezuelan constitutional changes.Barton Paul Levensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07630802738456749652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-84347163702382196702018-10-01T03:38:09.533-04:002018-10-01T03:38:09.533-04:00Chavez's assault in democracy began by writing...Chavez's assault in democracy began by writing a new constitution which was approved by 32% of registered voters due to low turnout. But that wasnt enough, later he increased the Supreme Court numbers, stuffed it with his guys, and the rest is history. Given what i know about the left, the similar approaches, techniques, and playbooks, it sure seems there's broad coordination and exchanges of ideas across borders. Fernando Leanmehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16085680730729620836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-37163979685288999982018-10-01T03:12:13.399-04:002018-10-01T03:12:13.399-04:00> I recall listening to him talk about how much...> I recall listening to him talk about how much better it would be for judges to interpret ambiguous statutory language than administrative experts<br /><br />Do you? I'm doubtful. Certainly not in those words. <a href="http://mustelid.blogspot.com/2018/09/kavanaughs-views-on-epas-climate.html" rel="nofollow">I quote</a> "Chevron deference precludes judges from exercising that judgment, forcing them to abandon what they believe is “the best reading of an ambiguous statute” in favor of an agency’s construction. Brand X, supra, at 983. It thus wrests from Courts the ultimate interpretative authority to “say what the law is,” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 (1803), and hands it over to the Executive" though that turns out to be Thomas. But within the system, that's correct: ultimate interpretative authority does lie with the courts (do you disagree?).<br /><br />Also, are you sure that it is always the "adminstrative technical experts" who do the interpreting, unswayed by politics, their superiors, or special interests in any way?<br /><br />> gradually neutering Chevron is a model for<br /><br />You're not suggesting that Chevron comes into RvW, are you?<br /><br />> stole, which would be done by adding two more<br /><br />Seems reasonable.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-57600016919397773302018-10-01T02:16:17.517-04:002018-10-01T02:16:17.517-04:00Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley at, I...Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley at, I think, George Washington University encourages a much larger Supreme Court. I disremember his figure but 17 might be a good number. You might care to help enthuse all with the idea that bigger is better. David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15914145623997712113noreply@blogger.com