Category: Media

Destroying The Court To Save It: Democrats Wrongly Use Ginsburg To Push Court Packing Scheme

Below is my column in USA Today on the growing calls for packing the Supreme Court with up to six new members as soon as the Democrats gain control of both houses of Congress and the White House.  I was critical of Democratic nominee Joe Biden this week when he refused to answer a question of whether he supports this call by his running mate Kamala Harris and other Democratic leaders. Biden told reporters “It’s a legitimate question, but let me tell you why I’m not going answer…it will shift the focus.” That was an extraordinary statement since if the question was legitimate, the refusal to answer it was not. Many of us would not support a presidential candidate who supported the packing of the Court. If Biden considers this a viable option, he is not a viable candidate for many of us. This is a central issue in the presidential campaign that has been pushed by Harris and top Democrats.  Yet, Biden is refusing to confirm his position. What is particularly concerning is that Biden precisely and correctly denounced court packing schemes like the one supported by this running mate.  Just a year ago, he insisted “No, I’m not prepared to go on and try to pack the court, because we’ll live to rue that day.”

Here is the column: Continue reading “Destroying The Court To Save It: Democrats Wrongly Use Ginsburg To Push Court Packing Scheme”

Fact Check: New York Times Cuts Precedent for Election Year Nominations By Almost Half [Updated]

Last night, I was finalizing my column for USA Today when one of my editors flagged my reference to the roughly 30 election-year nominations to the Supreme Court as a possible error.  The New York Times ran a story declaring that there “there have been 16 Supreme Court vacancies that occurred before Election Day.” I have previously discussed glaring misstatements of cases in major media, but this was unnerving because the New York Times was suggesting that the precedent for the current nomination was roughly half as previously thought. I decided to do another rough count and, if anything, it would seem that the 29 nomination figure is arguably too low and that there appears almost twice the number cited by the New York Times.  The difference appears in part counting a calendar year rather than a year from election, but that approach causes problems in comparison given the earlier early election calendars.

Continue reading “Fact Check: New York Times Cuts Precedent for Election Year Nominations By Almost Half [Updated]”

Turley To Speak At The University Of Michigan On Impeachment

Today I have the pleasure of speaking at the University of Michigan as part of a Constitution Day event.  I will be joined by Professor Michael Gerhardt (UNC School of Law) in discussing the history of presidential impeachments from Johnson to Trump. Both Professor Gerhardt and I testified at both the Clinton and Trump impeachment. I also served as lead defense counsel in the last judicial impeachment of Judge Thomas Porteous. The event was switched to a virtual format and will be held from 4:10 to 5:30 pm ET today. You can join via Zoom at https://umich.zoom.us/j/97622039094

Continue reading “Turley To Speak At The University Of Michigan On Impeachment”

“Opus Dei, Anyone?”: Laurence Tribe Raises Barr’s Religious Beliefs In Latest Diatribe [Updated]

Many of us criticized statements attributed to Attorney General Bill Barr this week calling for the use of sedition laws against rioters. However, instead of raising constitutional or statutory objections, Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe instead raised Barr’s Catholic faith in a completely unwarranted and unfounded tweet. The response to the reference was total silence. Not a single professor at Harvard or elsewhere chastised the use of a person’s religion in such commentary. This is not the first profane or prejudiced statement by Tribe.

Continue reading ““Opus Dei, Anyone?”: Laurence Tribe Raises Barr’s Religious Beliefs In Latest Diatribe [Updated]”

Dershowitz Sues CNN For $300,000,000 In Defamation Action

Alan Dershowitz just filed a whale of a lawsuit against CNN, though it could end up beached in short order under controlling case law.  The Harvard Law professor emeritus is demanding $300,000,000 in compensatory and punitive damages from CNN for misrepresenting his legal arguments in the Trump impeachment trial.  In fairness to Dershowitz, the coverage of the trial by CNN was dreadful with intentionally and consistently slanted coverage of the evidence, standards, and arguments.  However, the objections raised by Dershowitz are likely to be treated as part of the peril for high-profile figures operating in the public domain. In other words, you can complain about the weather but you cannot sue the storm. Continue reading “Dershowitz Sues CNN For $300,000,000 In Defamation Action”

Trump’s Weekly Fox Show? It Could Present Some Interesting Political and Legal Issues

There was an awkward moment this morning on Fox when President Donald Trump announced that he would have a regular appearance on Fox and Friends every week at this time. That came as obvious news to the hosts who repeatedly told the President that there is no such understanding. The exchange, however, raises a legal question of whether such a regular show with the President would run afoul of federal laws requiring equal time for political candidates. The answer is likely no but it is not clear if Joe Biden would relish a regular segment on Fox since he has largely avoided such interviews. Continue reading “Trump’s Weekly Fox Show? It Could Present Some Interesting Political and Legal Issues”

Stanford Journalism Professor Rejects Objectivity In Journalism

For four years, I have written about the alarming loss of neutrality and objectivity in journalism — a trend that is reflected by many polls showing that the majority of the public no longer trusts the media for fair and honest reporting. While I have regularly criticized President Donald Trump, I have also objected to unrelentingly biased reporting as well as embarrassingly soft coverage of former Vice President Joe Biden. Now, Stanford Communications Professor Emeritus Ted Glasser has publicly called for an end of objectivity in journalism as too constraining for reporters in seeking “social justice.”

Continue reading “Stanford Journalism Professor Rejects Objectivity In Journalism”

Doth Protest Too Much? Why Corporate and Academic Confessions Increasingly Fall On Deaf Ears

Twitter/Screenshot

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the anti-racism demonstrations from the NFL displays to corporate campaigns to academic confessions. What is most striking about these campaigns is how little they are likely to impact opinions on racism. Indeed, the NFL displays were not only booed by fans but denounced by figures like former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick as meaningless propaganda. Most people are unwilling to discuss racism honestly.  Booing is a form of anonymous speech and many of those individuals would not want to speak publicly about countervailing views of racial justice or the role of the NFL in such causes. Unless we can have that honest (and mutually tolerant) discussion, few minds will be changed in these campaigns.  That requires a real interest in discussing different views of racial justice and its underlying issues for social reform, not just repeating affirmations or offering confessions.  Otherwise, many are tuning out these demonstrations. There is clearly a view of many that corporations “doth protest too much” and mean too little in terms of real change in attitudes on racism.

Here is the column:

Continue reading “Doth Protest Too Much? Why Corporate and Academic Confessions Increasingly Fall On Deaf Ears”

“I See Nothing Wrong With It”: Rhode Island Professor Defends Murder Of Right-Wing Protester In Portland

Most human beings were disgusted by the murder of Aaron “Jay” Danielson, the member of the right-wing group Patriot Prayer, in Portland. University of Rhode Island Professor Erik Loomis is not among them. Loomis defended the killing by Michael Reinoehl, an Antifa member who appears to have stalked Danielson before gunning him down.  Loomis insisted that any problem in gunning down right-wing counterprotesters was tactical not moral. Continue reading ““I See Nothing Wrong With It”: Rhode Island Professor Defends Murder Of Right-Wing Protester In Portland”

No, Twitter Should Not Take Down The McConnell Parody

For years, I have criticized those who have called for increased censorship on the Internet, including regulation of political speech by companies like Facebook and Twitter. There is a legitimate debate over the continued use of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act by these companies when they are engaged in such censorship (and alleged viewpoint bias). However, President Donald Trump’s call for Twitter to take down a parody of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is wrong on a number of levels. It would only fuel the erosion of free speech on the Internet in curtailing political commentary. Continue reading “No, Twitter Should Not Take Down The McConnell Parody”

Adrift Over The Atlantic: How The President and The Press Destroyed The Ability Of The Public To Judge Scandals

Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the recent controversy surrounding The Atlantic article on alleged comments by President Donald Trump disparaging veterans and war dead buried at Aisne-Marne American Cemetery. I have been highly critical of President Trump response, particularly his calling for the firing of a Fox reporter for confirming elements of the story.  In truth, Fox did not confirm that Trump called the dead buried at the French cemetery “losers” and “suckers.” Indeed, Fox reporter Jennifer Griffin said today that her source did not hear those references to those buried at the cemetery.  However, there are sources that have said that Trump used such terms to describe Vietnam veterans. Conversely, in an interview with CNN, the author of the article Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg was confronted by strong rebuttals by various officials over the assertion that the cancellation of the Trump visit was due to his concern over his hair or a disparaging view of the fallen.  When asked about documents and witnesses suggesting that the cancellation was weather related as claimed, Goldberg simply seemed to shrug and say that those accounts might be true but that Trump still holds disrespectful views of veterans.  That was hardly a resounding defense of those elements of his article. Moreover, when the evidence was presented that the helicopter was grounded, Goldberg noted that the grounding is insulting to Marines who said that they can fly in any weather. However, again, that is not what the story said and it was the military that objected to flying (the issue was not that the helicopter could not fly but that it would have to fly too low for the safety of the President). The problem for many in the public is that we have lost any presumption that either the president or the press is a reliable source in such controversies. Indeed, according to polls, a majority find both untrustworthy. This is where the cost of such eroded trust are the highest. After years of lying or bias, both sides have left the public with no credible basis to know the truth in a major scandal.

Here is the column:

Continue reading “Adrift Over The Atlantic: How The President and The Press Destroyed The Ability Of The Public To Judge Scandals”

The Second Battle of Belleau Wood: Trump Attacks On Fox Reporter Triggers Bipartisan Resistance

Scott_Belleau_WoodRepublicans from Fox’s Brit Hume to GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger(Ill.) have rushed to the defense Fox New reporter Jennifer Griffin, who was attacked by President Donald Trump for simply confirming aspects of the recent explosive story in The Atlantic. My column this weekend discussed the article alleging that Trump has spoken in disparaging terms of our veterans and war dead. Trump called for Griffin to be fired despite other news organizations also reporting that Trump has referred to veterans as “losers” and “suckers.”  Trump seemed most upset by the fact that Griffin was saying that she “confirmed” the story when in fact she confirmed comments allegedly made about Vietnam veterans, not the specific alleged comment on war dead in France from World War I.  That is a valid point, though likely lost on most citizens who correctly view such references to veterans of any war as vile and disgraceful.  Moreover, it is outrageous for a president to call for a respected reporter to be fired for doing her job. Yet, what is most striking is how, again, Trump’s attacks only magnify the attention and damage of the story.

Continue reading “The Second Battle of Belleau Wood: Trump Attacks On Fox Reporter Triggers Bipartisan Resistance”

Set Up or Slander: Did Pelosi Defame A Salon Owner?

download-2

Thirty years after the late D.C. Mayor Marion Barry’s famous statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared that a Salon owner set her up in an embarrassing incident where Pelosi was shown not just violating San Francisco’s pandemic laws in getting her hair done but not wearing a mask while doing it. Pelosi refused to take responsibility for the violation (including the failure to wear a mask) and, in the tape below, only took responsibility to “failing for a set up.” She added “I think that this salon owes me an apology, for setting me up.” The Salon owner, Erica Kious, has stated that she expects to close eSalon after receiving a torrent of death threats and hostile massages after Pelosi’s allegation. The question is whether she could actually sue for defamation. Continue reading “Set Up or Slander: Did Pelosi Defame A Salon Owner?”

Riotous or Racist? CNN’s Chris Cillizza Blasts President Trump For Using The Word “Riots”

This-is-cnn-

We have previously discussed how some media organizations told their journalists not to call violence after the death of George Floyd “riots,” including the recently much mocked headline of CNN calling the looting and violence in Kenosha “fiery but mostly peaceful.”  Now, Chris Cillizza, an editor-at-large for CNN, is under fire for criticizing President Donald Trump for labeling the violence in places like Kenoska as “riots.” Critics have noted that the picture posted by Cillizza with his tweet shows a building engulfed in flames.  Lawyers notoriously parse terms in ways that often deny their obvious meaning but this effort by some in the media would make a Philadelphia lawyer blush.

Continue reading “Riotous or Racist? CNN’s Chris Cillizza Blasts President Trump For Using The Word “Riots””

Federal Court Rules In Favor Of Sarah Palin’s Defamation Lawsuit Against The New York Times

USDCSDNYSarah Palin is about to get all mavericky in court. Indeed, the former Alaskan governor and vice presidential candidate just might be making new law in the area of defamation. Palin’s won a major victory in a decision by Judge Jed S. Rakoff, who ruled that she could go to trial o a particularly outrageous editorial by The New York Times in June 2017.  The editorial suggested that she inspired or incited Jared Loughner’s 2011 shooting of then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz.  The case also involves a curious twist due to the involvement of James Bennet, who resigned in the recent controversy over an editorial by Sen. Tom Cotton.  I supported Bennet’s decision to publish that editorial and denounced the cringing apology of the Times after a backlash.

Continue reading “Federal Court Rules In Favor Of Sarah Palin’s Defamation Lawsuit Against The New York Times”