E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
The primary goal of the political left at this point in time has to be winning elections, not figuring out how much of the New Deal/Warren Court judicial legacy can be salvaged. O'Connor in many ways was a greater gift to far right conservatives than many publicly acknowledge (though private acknowledgment may be common). By assuring "moderates" the court would not do anything really Neaderthal on social issues, she and Kennedy (who may have told clerks that his votes in abortion cases were designed to save Republicans) enable suburbanites to vote their pocketbook without risking their bedrooms (or conscience). This suggests that rhetoric ought to focus on the 2006 Senate elections and in forcing Republican moderates to choose. In particular, Democrats should recognize that a filibuster may be serve vital Republican interests. Bush and company get full credit with the right for appointing a very conservative justice (does anyone really think our frat boy president has any real concern with abortion), Olympia Snowe and company do not have to actually decide whether to vote on the justice. If Bush goes to the far right, the better approach is for Democrats to insist this is what the Republicans stand for, rather than adopt tactics that enable the Republican coalition to hold together. Posted
3:29 PM
by Mark Graber [link]
Comments:
It is a good conclusion you have come to. But I cannot help but think that if the fillibuster is not used it will be a lost opportunity for the left.
If it is used and stopped with that "option" it can start the necessary all out war that must ensue. Where one side can use old senate laws against the extreme on the otherside. Eventually I'd hope that this would lead to everyone finally returning to their senses on both sides of the aisle.
I think that this fight could still help in 2006. Yes, it might rally the base of the right but it would also rally the left.
I think that it is a big mistake, but an easy one for an academic to make, to assume that a person's college-age persona defines them for all time, as you do when you describe Bush as a frat boy. Academics generally are the people who were successful in college and didn't change thereafter. Most adults go out into the real world and many of them change substantially.