Balkinization   |
Balkinization
Balkinization Symposiums: A Continuing List                                                                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 Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts "Gotcha"
|
Thursday, June 19, 2008
"Gotcha"
Sandy Levinson
I seem to be one of the few Americans who almost never watched Meet the Press and tended to fold Tim Russert into the general company of media bloviators. I was, of course, touched by his death, not least because he was nine years younger than I am. I was also moved by many of the heartfelt tributes to his niceness as a human being. The one and only time our paths crossed was when he attended a fund-raiser at a Jamaca Plain, Massachusetts restaurant/bar for an aged nun. (The funds were being raised by selling political posters and memorabilia, and I collect depictions of the American flag, which explains my own attendance!) He did indeed seem to be a regular guy and far more knowledgeable about American politics than many of his colleagues.
Comments:
my answer is: "I would torture the person if I was strongly convinced that he has knowledge of the bomb, but I would expect to be criminally prosecuted". The jury would decide my punishment.
Good call. I'd be a bit stronger on both sides: "I would torture the person if I knew beyond all conceivable doubt that he possessed information that would save the lives of hundreds or thousands of Americans. And then I would turn myself in to the authorities for breaking the law."
I'd like to address a tangential matter, concerning Remnick's article to which you link. Remnick praises Russert's repeating his question, "When does life begin?," to Al Gore as an example of Russert's not backing off easily. It may have been that, but it was also an example of the mass media's mindlessness. This is because "When does life begin?" is a stupid question and is not helpful in deciding how we should view abortion, morally or legally.
It is an empirical fact that a newly conceived fetus is alive (under any reasonable definition of "life"); everyone, on either side of the abortion question, should acknowledge that. On one side, one must argue for the right to abort a fetus even though it is alive, and, on the other side, one must argue against the right to abort a fetus by asserting something beyond the obvious fact that a fetus is alive. Russert was probably bright enough to know that, so he must have been pandering to audience.
A technical question: Both of the first two responses in effect presume that a sitting President is subject to criminal prosecution. Is that true? i take key to the Court's decision in Clinton v. Jones was that it was a civil suit, with no possibility, for example, that the President would be sentenced to jail.
So would one expect him to say "I would torture... but then immediately resign and turn myself in" or "I would torture ... but then encourage the House to impeach me"? To say that "I would serve out my term and then expect to be subjected to criminal prosecution afterward" is something of a fudge.
is impeachment limited only to the duration in office .. ?? i read a piece the other day that suggests impeachment can also be applied after leaving office .. such form to deprive an illegal actor from colllecting s pension .. or also to bar a given person from further governmental service in any capacity ..
????
Prof. Levinson puts forth the hypothetical:
If he says there have been no examples of the ticking bomb, then why won't the bloviator say, but what if there were? If I were Obama, I'd say, "And if pigs could fly, we'd all carry cast-iron umbrellas." Of course, I'm free to offer this advice, because I'm not Obama. ;-) Of course, my response to the TTB question (now over two years old and long in the tooth) has been repeatedly linked by me whenever the subject comes up.... Cheers,
I'd ask the questioner who he would trust to authorize the torture of his friends if some CIA operative became convinced they had information about an impending attack.
After all, if it's thinkable that there would be a "ticking bomb scenario", then it's thinkable that some journalist might have information about it without knowing -- or believing -- they have it, and be unwilling to give that information.
I suggest "I'll answer that if you'll answer me this: if God can do anything, can he make a stone so heavy He can't lift it?" In other words, this hypothetical is about as meaningful as a logical fallacy.
Or, "I'll be ready to answer that if it ever happens, just as I'll be ready to respond if aliens from Proxima Centuri arrive with free gasoline, but I should mention that I have pretty good reason to expect neither is gonna happen." Or, "I think you're confusing the real world with '24'. Maybe I can help you: Jack Bauer is a fictional character, '24' is a TV show, a form of entertainment, and the ticking bomb solved by torture in '24' happens all the time in Jack's fictional world but not in the real world. Does anyone have a question about the real world?" However I also much like the suggested answers from dwh, mike, and arne. Perhaps that shows often you can find not just an answer to a Gotcha, but several, all of them decent and reasonable. And perhaps that in turn shows that a Gotcha is a problem for the unprepared, the not very able, liars, hypocrites, and two-faced scoundrels, and not so much for able, honest, prepared folks.
"It should be obvious that one of the principal "Gotcha" exercises in the upcoming campaign, particularly in one of the presidential debates or "town-meetings," will be to pose the "ticking-bomb" hypothetical and to ask McCain and Obama (but, obviously, particularly Obama) what he would do with regard to torture."
But as you noted above, Russert's "gotchas" revolved around researching a guest's past statements, and posing questions that catch them contradicting those statements. Has Obama made past statements approving of torture in ticking timebomb situations? Obama has a lot of past statements that could form the basis for gotchas, an extraordinary number, really, but not, so far as I know, in the area of state sponsored torture.
There is no reason to believe that Obama has ever supported torture in any way. Unfortunately, one can't quite say the same of Sen. McCain, given his refusal to apply military standards to the CIA. And, given his fulminations aboud Boudimiene and his playing of the "fear card" re terrorism, I would be very surprised if no one asks the "gotcha" question.
Here's what I would say if I were Obama:
"As you know, X, ethicists have considered this scenario and it's a phony issue because of 1 and 2. So let me re-phrase the question to you: Suppose the ONLY way you could get the essential information was to rape and torture the suspect's 6 year old daughter. Would you do it? Would Senator McCain?
To say that "I would serve out my term and then expect to be subjected to criminal prosecution afterward" is something of a fudge.
True enough. I suppose the point of my initial response was the confession, not the subsequent action. I'd throw myself at the mercy of the Court (or Senate, or American People) and let the chips fall where they may.
Well, this would be my answer anyway:
"If I knew for sure that there really was a ticking time bomb, and if I knew for sure that the loss of thousands or tens of thousands of lives was imminent, and if I knew for sure that we had in custody the one man who could prevent this tragedy, and if I knew for sure that we had done everything that we absolutely could do short of torture to get the proper information from him, and if I knew for sure that torturing him would actually get the truth from him, then yes I would resort to torture. But that's an awful lot of ifs to hang a crime against humanity on. Because make no mistake about it, no matter what the justification torture is a crime against humanity. "As for the Bush adminsitration, they have never come close to this threshold -- on the contrary, they have used torture in one long fishing expedition, trying to discover if maybe someone somewhere might know something about some plot of some unknown dimensions to do some damage to someone. In doing so the administration has tortured or santioned the torture of hundreds of innocent people who represented no threat to anyone anywhere."
Whatever happened to "prudence"? Oh, I forgot: It's dirty word with legal types who must absolutize everything.
HD kaliteli porno izle ve boşal.
Post a Comment
Bayan porno izleme sitesi. Bedava ve ücretsiz porno izle size gelsin. Liseli kızların Bedava Porno ve Türbanlı ateşli hatunların sikiş filmlerini izle. Siyah karanlık odada porno yapan evli çift. harika Duvar Kağıtları bunlar tamamen ithal duvar kağıdı olanlar var
|
Books by Balkinization Bloggers ![]() Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) ![]() David Pozen, The Constitution of the War on Drugs (Oxford University Press, 2024) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) ![]() Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin’s Press, 2022) ![]() Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) ![]() Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). ![]() Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). ![]() Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) ![]() Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) ![]() Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) ![]() Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) ![]() Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) ![]() Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) ![]() Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) ![]() Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) ![]() Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) ![]() Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution ![]() Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) ![]() Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) ![]() John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) ![]() Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) ![]() Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) ![]() James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) ![]() Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) ![]() Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) ![]() Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) ![]() Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) ![]() Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) ![]() Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) ![]() Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic ![]() Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) ![]() Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) ![]() Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) ![]() Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) ![]() Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) ![]() David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) ![]() Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) ![]() Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |