Turley To Speak At Yale Conference

200px-Yale_University_Shield_1.svgI will be speaking today at a conference at Yale as part of the annual William F. Buckley Jr. Program.  The conference is on “The Constitution and the Courts: Challenges, Opportunities, and the Future of Freedom.”  My specific panel addresses “Judicial Confirmations and Interpreting the Constitution: Borking, Activism, and Originalism.”

Speakers at the conference will include former U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte, Randy Barnett, Carlos Eire, E. Donald Elliott, David French, Mollie Hemingway, Michael McConnell, Judge William H. Pryor, Jr., Nicholas Rosenkranz, Peter Schuck, Ilya Shapiro, Jonathan Turley, Ed Whelan, and Adam White.

b0cbbd_5c47995cb0f145b38251d6415371be35.pngI will be joined on the panel by an esteemed group of academics including Georgetown Professor Randy Barnett and President of the Ethics Center and Public Policy Center Ed Whelan and Moderator Yale Law Professor E. Donald Elliott.

I will bringing my 11-year-old daughter Madie with me to the event in the hopes of getting her admitted on an early, early, early decision application.


15 thoughts on “Turley To Speak At Yale Conference”

  1. Don’t ask me I don’t give a damn. Next stop is Viet Nam!

    — Line one on the applicaption.

  2. I will bringing my 11-year-old daughter Madie with me to the event in the hopes of getting her admitted on an early, early, early decision application.

    Or you could be sensible and move to Alexandria or Takoma Park so she’d qualify for in-state tuition at College Park or GMU or UVa or VirginiaTech.

    See the following:

    2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

    Question: can you make the argument that the discretion of Congress to vest the appointment of inferior officers in said officials allows Congress to render the appointment of inferior officers subject to the advice and consent of state legislatures? If I’m not mistaken, among the ranks of federal district judges and U.S. Attorneys you have a couple hundred vacancies every year. It would improve attention in vetting and reduce the Senate’s work load to offload these tasks on state legislatures.

    Requiring the Senate to give advice and consent to the appointment of ambassadors &c is a relic. Why not dispense with the use of standing committees for this function and have the floor leaders in the Senate erect an ad hoc committee to examine each? The majority leader picks 4 names out of a hat, the minority leader picks three. If you insist on retaining advice and consent functions for the federal judiciary in the Senate, you could use this method as well. Each minority Senator would in that case serve on about 17 ad hoc committees a year, each majority Senator about 20.

    Why not cut the number of other positions in the executive subject to vetting by standing committees and Senate confirmation to about 350? That way, Senate committees would typically examine fewer than 10 appointments a year, most of them seats on boards and commissions whose members serve fixed terms.

  3. Enjoy New Haven. It’s gotten crime ridden over my lifetime but is still a nice small city in many respects. I’m sure your daughter loves pizza. And while I have come to realize the “best” pizza is what people grew up eating, no matter how horrible it is[see: Chicago deep dish], Wooster St. in New Haven has pizza ala Naples. The 2 that have been there for generations are Sally’s and Frank Pepe’s. People will tell you one is “the best” like the Coke or Pepsi choice. Well, having eaten many pizzas from both, I can certify BOTH are SUPERB.

      1. Increasing numbers of employers are investigating applicants’ social media postings. This video I imagine will get her application round-filed instantly. She isn’t worth the risk.

        Students such as this bring a new concept to in loco parentis. The university should act as the parent and teach these kids what their parents failed to do for eighteen prior years: teach resilience; respect; and reasonableness. Critical and independent thinking might go a long way as well. Instead they are pandering to these spoiled brats and just encouraging more of this misbehavior.

    1. It is pointless to engage in a dialogue with persons such as some of these students. When they start the shouting and disrespect turn and walk away.

        1. You are correct, of course about winning after the screaming begins. I might counter a bit in that by availing one’s self for debate with this students affords them a measure of credibility, in that they are respected somewhat by showing they matter enough to debate. For me at least I am no longer willing to deal with these fools and lemmings. It isn’t worth the aggravation, money, or detraction from my schedule.

          1. For you and me, that’s right. But if I’m responsible for those kids education, I’d give them an education they wouldn’t forget once they let loose the F-bomb.

Comments are closed.