One of our graduates on the judicial bench is in hot water this week. Justice Barbara Pariente (GW Class of 1973) is facing demands from Florida Gov. Rick Scott that she be disqualified in a case over judicial appointments due to a comment caught on a live microphone. On November 1st, Pariente was caught pointing to a document listing members of the Supreme Court Judicial Nominating Commission and saying “crazy.” Update: As predicted, the high court rejected the effort to disqualify Pariente over her remark.
We have hit another milestone today with over 33,000,000 views. We are also expected to reach 35,000 followers on Twitter. That hardly makes us competition for the largest sites but it is still an impressive collection of people seeking a place for civil but passionate discourse on legal and policy issues of our time (and perhaps a few wacky stories). We often use these milestones to look at the current profile of the blog and its supporters around the world.
As always, I want to offer special thanks for our weekend contributors: Mike Appleton, Larry Rafferty, Darren Smith, Kimberly Dienes, and Cara Gallagher (particularly Darren who continues help up with periodic technical problems etc).
I particularly want to thank our regular commentators and readers. We try to keep this blog as an open forum with as little interference or monitoring of the comments as possible. Given our free speech orientation, we try not to delete comments and, for that reason, we are deeply appreciative of how most people avoid personal or offensive comments in debating these issues. We have had to delete a handful of comments with personal attacks or profanity but the number remains quite low for a blog of this size. The success of this blog is due to the fact that we offer something more than the all-too-common troll-driven, angry, and insulting commentary of the Internet. Thank you for voluntarily assuming restraint over the tenor and content of your comments. Continue reading
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the need to end “blue slipping” in the United States Senate. I have long criticized the “courtesy” allowing a single senator to block a nominee as inimical to our constitutional system. I have maintained this position throughout both Democratic and Republican administrations.
Here is the column:
On Monday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit restored the latest travel ban imposed by President Donald Trump. I previously criticized (here and here) the challenges to the travel ban and I believe that the Ninth Circuit is on solid ground in ruling the government can bar entry of people from six Muslim-majority countries with no connections to the United States. In my view, the injunction issued in Hawaii ignored the significance of not only critical differences in the third travel order but also the prior decision of the Supreme Court to vacate the prior injunction.
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the allegations against Hillary Clinton and her campaign. Yesterday, the controversy surrounding the Russian dossier deepened after it was disclosed that the co-founder of Fusion GPS (the company hired by the Clinton campaign to do the dossier) met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya before she met with Donald Trump Jr. Indeed, she met with the Fusion officials shortly before and shortly after she met with Trump Jr. in Trump Tower. Just hours before on June 9, 2016, Fusion co-founder and ex-Wall Street Journal reporter Glenn Simpson was with Veselnitskaya in a Manhattan federal courtroom. Simpson and Fusion GPS were hired by BakerHostetler, which represented Russian firm Prevezon through Veselnitskaya.
Here is the column:
Ok, maybe counsel over shot the jury a bit in the trial of Senator Robert Menendez. The Senator is facing allegations of bribes from Florida eye doctor Salomon Melgen ranging from luxury vacations to luxury flights to campaign contributions. After presenting a fairly complex case of gifts, influence peddling, and nuanced criminal standards, a question can back from the jury. The juror asked the judge “what is a senator?”