President Barack Obama today surprised many by nominating the moderate Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Merrick Garland. Garland is unlikely to thrill liberals. He is fairly conservative on criminal cases and tends to favor government interests. Conservatives are not going to like his vote to move to reconsider the case that became the historic Heller decision that recognized the individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment. However, Garland moves virtually everything off the table for the Republicans. While a moderate, he is as far right as a Democratic president could go.
In some ways, the Garland nomination seems to take a chapter from the sales book for car dealers. You take away every possible barrier while adding every possible extra from bucket seats to undercarriage rust proofing to leave only the question of whether you want to buy a car or not. Garland is a moderate who will be viewed by many liberals as too conservative. His age (63) and jurisprudence makes him less likely to be a truly transformative or legacy appointment. If you are looking for the lightest jurisprudential footprint, Garland would be that nominee. The President seems to be inviting the GOP to take out this nominee for a drive and “you will just love this ride.” They are clearly not buying however.
In truth, Garland would move the Court to the left by the mere fact that Scalia was so far to the right. He could indeed flip the result on campaign financing, gun rights, affirmative action and abortion. He would also likely support executive powers and federal agencies generally, but not necessarily uniformly. Since Scalia was a big supporter of the Chevron doctrine (as I discussed yesterday in testimony before Congress), this may not move the needle significantly and would not change administrative law on the issue of deference to federal agencies. Notably, however, in 2013, Garland voted against the administration on the secrecy surrounding drone strikes. He also, in 2008, he ruled that suspects could not be held as enemy combatants without an evidentiary foundation and, in 2004, ruled against the Environmental Protection Agency for the delay of enforcement of ozone standards in the District of Columbia.
Judge Garland’s vote to rehear the Parker (which became Heller) was joined by three other judges (against six rejecting a rehearing). As I discussed on NPR, he could certainly address that vote in a confirmation hearing if he had the opportunity. Judging from his past cases, there is a general view that Judge Garland did not agree with the general premise of the constitutional claim that this is an individual right to bear arms. Yet, Judge Garland could also argue that he did not feel that the existing case supported such a ruling and that as a lower court he felt constrained in reaching such a decision. However, the constitutional question was viewed by many as an open one — even though both sides believed strongly in the merits of their respective interpretations. He could also have disagreed with the analysis as opposed to the result. The oral argument primarily concerned the threshold question of the constitutional claim on the interpretation of the second amendment. Obviously, the vote raises a serious flag for those who do not want to risk undermining Heller, which is one of another of constitutional cases that could easily flip with the addition of the new justice. The general view is that Garland voted on the merits. If that is the view of conservatives, it could prove a barrier in a post-election push for his confirmation (if Hillary Clinton is elected). Indeed, if the NPR takes the view that he is anti-gun rights, it could “score” the confirmation vote — a serious threat for some senators of both parties.
Ironically, as I mentioned on Fox this morning, the moderate record of Garland may support the GOP in arguing that this is not about ideology but timing. Sen. Mitch McConnell has already portrayed this as “the Biden rule” in citing the position opposing consideration of a nominee in the final year. President Obama himself supported the filibuster of Justice Alito. McConnell has mapped out a position that this is not about “a person but principle” and that is unlikely to change.
Notably, Garland would continue the lock of the Court by Harvard and Yale graduates. It remains highly frustrating to many academics to see this absurd exclusive club. This county is the leader of the world in legal education with dozens of world-class law schools. Yet, once again, President Obama has stayed with these two schools.
I will be continuing commentary today at CNN, FOX and BBC but may blog from the road.
@Tnash
Yep! Bout time for all the dirty old men to start calling in! 🙂
I note CWD has ducked the question, and wants to talk about legal immigration, which isn’t much of an issue outside of displaced American workers. On some of these visas, Americans have been disadvantaged by their high student loan debt. An American “coder” might have a $700 per month higher living cost than some guy from India, not to mention that the Indian guy will sleep on a cot in a closet somewhere to be here. The employers can save a ton of money, not to mention all the stupid non-discrimination laws they have to navigate through with American workers, and a generalized laziness and shortage of intelligence with American young people.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Tin
Lawsuits? Are you sure? Harvard is private. I think they can admit anyone they chose. It’s public schools that may be sued.
Renegade:
It’s not about money. I understand that there is financial aid Harvard. But first you have to get admitted. A white kid whose father is a plumber, who graduates with a 4.0 from a public high school won’t get in. A black kid whose father is a government executive and graduates with a 3.2 will be admitted. That discrimination has been documented at selective colleges throughout the country. Over and over again. Hence all the lawsuits.
Tin
You previously wrote “While it is supposed to be an elite public university, virtually all the students come from wealthy backgrounds with professional parents.” Then next you say it’s not about the money.
Then there is the followup ethnic hypothetical which mixes apples and oranges. I keep hearing comparisons of GPA and parental status. I do get your point, but there is a strong correlation between success of a parent and future success of that child.
In any case, the part of this thread that I find challenging is the generalizations re. the 1%.
My wife and I are fortunate to have the financial means for a healthy retirement, but we each came from almost dirt poor fsmilies, proud but nearly dirt poor. There was no question that we both would go to college. I have a doctorate and our daughter has her masters and a very good paying job. She freely admits that not attending college
was not an option in our family.
She wanted an ivy league school until it hit her that the cost was prohibitive, no loans for her. She took the JC to University rout and has Harvard. Yale. Princeton. West Point grads, and others working under her.
So I don’t see why a certain schooling necessarily “merits” consideration as a vital part in defining 1% folks.
CWD….thanks for your onput.
I’m familiar with certain patterns/ changes in certain areas.
I am not familiar with Chicago or the other areas you mentioned; I’m more of a West Coast WASHINGTON, OREGON, CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, ETC. IN THE WESTERN U.S.
I omitted Idaho after my own special “Darien Roseen” type of welcome in 2014.
(You can google ROSEEEN V. IDAHO…Unfortunately, the lawsuit was dropped).
My WA. State license made me a marked man as soon as I crossed into their state.
Idahoans may yet assimilate.😊
Anyway, I don’t see the same progress re assimilation that you have observed in your area.
I’ll cite another example.My hometown in SE WA. State had a popular of c. 30,000, maybe 5% Hispanic when I grew up on the 1950s and 1960s.
They were generally good classmates and neighbors. And hard workers in harvests, etc.
That same Hispanic population is now 20-25% of that town’s population.
Melees involving 50-60 Mexican youths have occurred, more that once.
Gang affilitions and retaliations are more common; I would bet that the homocide rate ( drive by shootings, mostly) have tripled over the past 25 years.
A big change from when I grew up. I don’t view those activities as assimilation.
It IS a minority of that Mexican community, and it is mostly a c.30 year old and youngef problem, down to early teens.
That being said, the older Mexicans were great neighbors and an essential labor force in an agricultuaral commuity.
And most of the young kids are OK. But there IS one hell of a gang problem that’z mushroomed in that town since the early 1990s, and the Mexican population is “well-represented/active in homocides and other crimes.
Most Mexican v. Mexican gang violence.
My hometown probably had a Black population of maybe 1-2%. May be a bit larger now.
Black friends were largely integrated in the schools and neighborhoods…there was never any de jure segregation in that respect.
By the late 1960s when I started college, there was a noticable change in Black/ White relations, especially among younger Blacks.
There were more Blacks at my college than my hometown.
Black self-segregration was the rule rather than the exception. The civil rights goal of integration was largely frowned on.
Black segregation by choice, Black supremacy a,and Black miltitancy was, in my view, unwinding some of the progress…HUGE progess…of the very smart, very courageous mainstrain civil rights movement.
They had clear objectives re integration/ civil rights legislation and they largely a chieved those goal with the landmark civil rights legislation under LBJ.
Speaking Swahili or establishing separate U.S. or back to Africa movement was, in my opinion, an unrealistic, counterproductive fad embraced by a large % of young Blacks.
Blacks who may well have mingled freely and had White friends in the early to mid-1960s “pulled back” into an insular, outside group by the late 1960s.
There is a reason that we have a Martin Luther King holiday, streets and structures and memorials named after him, rathere than a Bobby Seal, Huey Newton, of Elijha Mohammed Boulevards.
I remember MLK, James Farmer, Roy Wilkens, Thurgood Marshall very well.
And what they actually accompliced.
Don’t know your age, or what your experience/ observations are, but this is what I saw re race relations.
Tnash
Just crossing over the 70th anniversary of exiting a nice warm carefree environment.
For the most part, I grew up in NE Montana, Graduated HS in Menlo Park, CA then NROTC at Ore State and Navy career.
My experience is a bit similar to yours. But my exposure to racial issues revolved around attitudes and outright discrimination against “red-skins”. Although, I remember family of origin beliefs that if Negroes washed their bodies as much as their hands, they would have lighter skin.
In 1962-64 was at HS in Menlo Park, CA and had a really great friendship with a black guy…learned a great deal from him as we hit it off right away..both tall and always played on the same pick-up bball games. At graduation, we tried to introduce our respective families to each other. The chill on that gorgeous sunny day was instantaneous…both sides. The next year (’65 ) riots at a nearby high school.
At OSU the Globetrotters came to town in 65 or 66, and no hotel would put them up. Dark skin foreign exchange students..no problem. Not one black was part of the OSU NROTC battalion.
My adult real exposure to full blown racist attitudes occurred while riding the rivers in Vietnam. From there I went to a ship as a department head and proposed forming a human relations team with enlisted from the major ethnic groups..white, black, Filipino, Hispanic, Asian. We were headed to Vietnam and would have 300 Marines along with 300 in ships complement. In 1972, that could well be an explosive environment, cooped up for weeks at a time.
Our ship was the only one during the response to the NVA Easter Offensive that did not have a reportable incident. An oiler got kicked out of Subic Bay…NOBODY got kicked out of that place!! Bad times.
Then we finally got home after 8 months. A short time later a newly formed fleet HR team came aboard and caused an uproar with our crew and team. Fleet team started sewing victim-hood which was really p – – -Ing the crew off. It was as if we hadn’t done anything right even though we were the only amphib force ship who completed every mission and picked up some for others, not to mention that we survived a head-on collision with wrong-way Typhoon Rita.
Discovered that being a 6’1″ white guy Naval Officer with blonde hair and blue eyes was an automatic disqualifiication in any ethnic dialogue. Even our team members were treated like the enemy. Our team had been the prototype for the special one week intensive training prior to deployment. The visiting fleet guys?? Not one day of training, just an implementing directive.
All it took was for an unsigned note to get up the chain and the part of the Navy Poem “tis well you have been acquited, t’would have been better if ye hadn’t been tried” really becomes a reality. Inaction becomes the rule of the day and festering occurs.
Nobody dares to face Sharpton down. Not be means of “in the face”, rather people (clergy in particular) standing in front of stores and saying “No!” Instead we open churches as sanctuaries of prayer as the town burns.
We inculcate run and hide instead of learning how to take down a gunman with drink cans, chairs, books even water bottles. Witness the shootings and note who the people of action are…nearly everyone is former military.
Well this has really gone off topic…but to close..
Notice that the classic high jacking of airliners is greatly reduced (nil?)…the heroes over Pennsylvania “let’s roll.”
Renegade….Thank you for sharing your experiences. It sounds like you were career? Navy.
When I was posting about the race issue, one thing that stood out in my experienc was the “re-segregation/ self-segregation of many younger Blacks.
Relations that might have been cordial in the early-to- mid ’60s between Black and White friends were less likely to be formed.
The mainstean civil rights movement, focused on equal rights under the law, and INTEGRATION, had achieved much.
The Black separatists, supremistists, militants were more prevelant by the late 1960s, and that “chill” was a noticable change in a short period of time.
(I was in college in the late ’60s to early 70s…..never in the military).
Did you notice a trend toward “self-segregation” in the Navy over time? I’m not sure exactly when you enlisted, or how long you served.
Muhammed Ali talked about meeting with the KKK to achieve their mutual goals of racial segregation.
The Nation of Islam he joined was itself a racist organization, and Ali was a devout disciple for many years.
Anyway, I felt that the “shift” away from the mainstream civil rights movement was counterproductive.
You noted the 1972 Easter offensive. At that point, I think Nixon had drawn down U.S. forces from 550,000,when he took office,to c. 70,000 in early 1972.
Based on what I followed at the time, and have subsequently read, the South Vietnamese military could have been rolled over by the North, but effectively repelled the offensive with U.S. air support.
The air support seemed critical to the S. Vietnamese defense, and overall their troops performed well during that major offensive.
I would be interested in your perspective on that 1972 Easter offensive.
Thanks again for sharing your observations/experiences.
David B. Benson….digressions into other topics are fairly common on this thread….started about halfway down with the “class issue”.
So just read the first half, mostly on topic.
This forum is pretty “freewheeling”, but you may consider applying for the position of Topic Monitor for this site, given your objections to morphing into side topics.
tnash
What current immigrants are not assimilating? In what way are they not assimilating?
We post posted at the same time,” Squeeklana”.
Get back to staffing the 900 line.😊
To CWD….It remains to be seen what impact “Merkle’s million” will have on German society and their economy.
@CWD
Don’t say bad things. Just tell me having 10+ applicants for a job drives wages up. Tell me how having 20+ applicants for a job drives wages up even more than having 10+ applicants.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
CWD – There is often a big “cultural divide” exibited by Muslim immigrants.
I’ ve found the Iranians to be fairly well assimilated, especially those who fled after the Shah fell.
Lots of them run convenience stores,etc.
The “Sunni” immigrants seem less assimilated, most clustered and cloistered.
I think it’s Dearborn? Michigan that has a pretty self-segregated Muslim community.
I don’t believe that American Muslims, on the whole, overtly support jihad/ terrorism.
The tiny minority that are hard core come from these communties, and that small number can obviously do a lot of damage.
Support from Islamic clerics and the Islamic community in general has been mixed, at best.
There ARE cases where plots ( c. 70 since 9-11)have bern foiled with the cooperation from some Muslims who step forward and inform authorities about potential threats/ jihadists.
Based on what I’ve seen of the assesment of law enforcement, there has generally been a problem getting information and cooperation within the American Muslin communities.
Muslin immigrants are maybe 2% of our population, much lower than Germany, France, or the U.K.
I’ll wait to see the ultimate impact of Merkles Million.
Maybe it will ultimately be a plus for the Germany economy.
It could also prove to ne an economic drain and disruptive to German society and security.
It’s too early to declare one or the other outcome.
I have observed a huge influx of Orientals in the South Seattle-Tacoma area.
I had not spent much time there since the 1970s, when signs were still in English and virtually everyone spoke English.
It’s like travelling through a foreign country for miles after the huge changes in the demographics in that are, and others.
My assesment is that they are a fairly insular community, unlike some of the previous “Chinatowns” in America that assimilated in previous generations.
There is a “tower of Babel” effect in some school districts where students who speak dozens of foreign languaged, but little or no English.
The expectations of the 1880-1925 wave of immigrants was that English would learned, fairly quickly, by the immigrants and especially their children.
I don’t see that same progress today. The Hispanic immigrants seem to be more likely to be “stuck” with no English skills, and it makes it tougher on them and schools, etc.
These are a few examples of where I see S L O W or no assimilation.
Everyone’s perspective will be shaped by where they live, what they observe,etc.
These observations reflect my take on the assimilation issue.
The foreign born percentage of our population is the highest since about 1925.
Immigration was then restricted until the mid -1960s, then a new wave of immigration began. It got us back to the peak foreign born years after the massive
wave of immigrants came to America from c. 1880-1925.
Those immigrants, for the most part, learned English.
Their children almost all became fluent in English.
The old history books referred to America as a “melting pot” of different cultures, all united as Americans.
That asseesment was a bit overblown, but for the most part the European and Oriental immigrants did assimilate within 2-3 generations.
Risking the standard charge of “xenophobia”, I draw a distinction between a “melting pot” and a crazy quilt combination of clashing cultures that don’t seem to be assimilating over genetations.
Leaving aside economic pros and cons of immigration, the “cultural divisions effect ” of peak % of foreign born Americans is a legitimate topic.
SQWEEKY telling it like it is.
I’m personally not so high on even legal immigration Where I live ,Asian women speed down the street while driving LEXUS SUVs. They walk in the street rather than stay on the sidewalk. They spit, blow their nose without using a tissue or handkerchief, many carry some kind of long stick or other “weapon” — in a peaceful
neighborhood w/very little crime – of ANY kind. They make no effort to learn English, and dogs quake in their presence — they seem to sense that many Asians consider dog meat a delicacy. In the park, they use wooden benches as exercise bars – and eventually the slats break. They could easily do their swaying exercises at home, but don’t. They own small businesses that cater to other minorities, and most of their convenience stores have illegal slot machines in a back room.
Overpopulation causes many problems. We don’t need more spies in the hood seeking to extend China’s territory.
Poor Sqeeky. She doesn’t adapt well to any structures that she herself has not built.
Merkle is not Mother Theresa. She allowed in the legal immigrants because they will benefit Germany. But of course, you know all the economic schools of thought. Forgive me for objecting.
FWIW
http://www.newsweek.com/harvard-too-jewish-has-become-too-asian-342335
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Tin
Sounds like you’re ready to back the Sanders college plan!
Do you realize that Alan Dershowitz ,or any Jew, benefited by a sort of Affirmative Action when Jews were denied entrance to many universities? Hell, they weren’t even able to belong to the country club.
And do you realize the Sandra Day O’Connor needed a sort of Affirmative Action when she couldn’t get a job as an attorney?
America often needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into a more tolerant society. If Affirmative Action is the only means, so be it. Such policies have made us a better country.
@CWD
Plus, the only thing that is “impossible” to discuss about “illegal immigration”, is how in anybody’s ever-loving mind it HELPS Americans? Like I said before, there is absolutely NO school of economic thought which says bringing in millions and millions of low-skilled workers benefits a nation that has massive unemployment and massive underemployment. Period. Not one school of economic thought.
And talk about “settled science” — the fact that an excess of low skilled workers exerts downward pressure on wages is axiomatic. Translation = a bunch of unskilled workers drives down wages for all unskilled workers. Poor black people make less, poor white people make less, poor hispanic people make less, poor asian people make less—-because there are 10+ applicants for every job.
Sooo, why would anybody with a half a lick of sense be all for illegal immigration, unless they could somehow profit off of lower wages and poverty??? Bingo! There it is! What party swaps puny benefits for votes? The Democrats. Who makes money off cheap labor? Rich Democrats and rich Republicans.
Which means that all those idiotic young fascists who shut down the Trump rally are really in the service of the 1%. Can you say IRONY???
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
@CWD
Florida.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Let’s just confine my statements about the benefits of immigration to legal immigrants. It’s apparent that illegal immigration is an impossible subject here.
Sqeeky. You need to indulge in some long-term thinking. Retirees do NOT grow a struggling community.
BOTH Democrats and Republicans have historically moved to delay or block Presidential appointments in Lame Duck years. This is because the Supreme Court has effectively legislated from the bench. If personal politics did not come into play, and the SC took a strictly Constitutionalist stance, then there would not be this hysteria every time a seat goes vacant.
The risk the GOP is taking here is if they block this appointment, and either Hillary Clinton or Bernie win the Presidential election, then Garland will seem like a conservative dream compared with who they appoint.
CWD:
“I guess Sqeeky is unaware that immigration can give a strong boost to dying rural communities and are invaluable in countries that are suffering from low birth rates. Immigration would have gone a long way toward helping Japan recover.” Japan is suffering from severe population decline. Most Japanese are not getting married or having children at all. Immigration can be both positive and negative here in the US. Some immigrants are highly educated and benefit society right away. Some are poor but really hard working, and become business owners and contributors within a few years.
It’s really illegal immigration that causes the most negative. Since they go through no criminal or health screening process, you get drug dealers, human traffickers, gang members, murderers, ISIS sympathizers, and antibiotic resistant TB. You also get really good people, who are coming in such large numbers that they hog all the benefits available by jumping in front of the line of other really good people from all over the world who do follow the immigration laws. We spend billions of dollars on illegal immigrants, money that could go towards helping legal immigrants, women’s shelters, fixing roads, infrastructure…there’s a lot of good we could do with that money if people would only give us the respect of immigrating legally, even if claiming sanctuary as a refugee.
@ CDW
A Ph.D anthropologist doesn’t provide access to elite institutions in and of itself. But networking and funding from the Rockerfeller Foundation to underwrite your years of research in Indonesia and Ford Foundation grants funding your academic junkets to study around the world gave Obama’s mother access to people of influence and power, which is how she got her son admitted to a super prestigious and competitive prep school, that in turn proved to be a ticket to the Ivy League.
And as far as immigration is concerned, all immigrants are not the same. A 1,000 engineers from Japan and Germany will help our society. A 1,000 welfare recipients from Somalia will be a net drain on resources.
@ Chicago Adman
You may very well be right about Garland. There was a time in this country when white people of extraordinarily academic talent could access the top universities based on merit alone. In the 60s and perhaps the 70s that was still possible. But in more recent decades, it has become virtually impossible for a middle-class white, much less a poor one, to gain access to elite universities. They have been displaced by set-aside programs for minorities. At my alma mater, the average family wealth of the students has tripled since the late 70s. While it is supposed to be an elite public university, virtually all the students come from wealthy backgrounds with professional parents. It is a troubling trend, in my view. It means that a white person, someone like Alan Dershowitz with a degree from Brooklyn College, would never be accepted at Yale today. Instead we will get a middling academic talent like Michelle Obama or Clarence Thomas. Affirmative action is not worth the cost, in my view.
Regarding opportunity of middle class:
This article may correct wrongheaded assertion re middle income ability to attend.basd on income
Undergraduate Cost And Financial Aid
Families with students on scholarship pay an average of $11,500 annually toward the cost of a Harvard education. More than 65 percent of Harvard College students receive scholarship aid, and the average grant this year is $46,000.
Since 2007, Harvard’s investment in financial aid has climbed by more than 70 percent, from $96.6 million to $166 million per year.
During the 2012-2013 academic year, students from families with incomes below $65,000, and with assets typical for that income level, will generally pay nothing toward the cost of attending Harvard College. Families with incomes between $65,000 and $150,000 will contribute from 0 to 10 percent of income, depending on individual circumstances. Significant financial aid also is available for families above those income ranges.
Harvard College launched a net price calculator into which applicants and their families can enter their financial data to estimate the net price they will be expected to pay for a year at Harvard. Please use the calculator to estimate the net cost of attendance.
The total 2015-2016 cost of attending Harvard College without financial aid is $45,278 for tuition and $60,659 for tuition, room, board and fees combined.
I did not seek racial mix.
@CWD
We ain’t Japan. Our population is not declining. Yet. As an economic matter, yes an influx of illegal immigrants can help a community. Just like an influx of military retirees or the disabled. Because there is an influx of Federal money for welfare, social security, pensions, and disability payments,
But somebody has to either collect taxes, or borrow money to pay the immigrants. For retirees and the disabled, that cost is built in. But for illegal immigrants it is a net loss. The rest of the country has to pay the bill, or charge it to their children’s credit cards.
Try reading this. Just one state, Ohio.
http://www.fairus.org/publications/the-costs-of-illegal-immigration-to-ohioans
How come liberals, who are always going on about how all other civilized nations have universal health care, neglect to mention that all other nations, civilized or not, have immigration polices, and don’t have “open borders.” You have bought into the Democratic Party leadership’s massive vote buying scheme. Please do some research, OK?
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I’m falling down laughing! An anthropologist PhD is of the power elite! Hysterical!