Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 12-10-2002, 12:16 PM

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/10/politics/10JUDG.html" target="_blank">Douglas W. Kmiec, the dean of the law school at Catholic University and a prominent social conservative scholar, Is Considered for Court</a>

Quote:

Professor Kmiec has written about the need for judges to interpret the Constitution with an eye to what theologians and scholars call "natural law." Adherents of natural law describe it as as a body of immutable truths based on religious or transcendent concepts of right and wrong, something higher than man-made law.

In a 1993 law review article, Professor Kmiec cited the Declaration of Independence, with its "we hold these truths to be self-evident" tone, as evidence that natural law theory should be part of a judge's approach. He wrote that natural law would be helpful in curbing "wayward judges" who, he said, "transform aberration into a civil right."

He wrote that the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973, upholding the right to abortion, was a violation of natural law.

"Roe v. Wade, which manufactured the right to kill the unborn, is perhaps the best example of where the natural law context of the Constitution has been most seriously offended," he said.

Undercurrent · 12-10-2002, 12:27 PM

"Natural Law" is just an acadaemic-sounding term for "my opinion".

RufusAtticus · 12-10-2002, 12:31 PM

Quote:

He wrote that the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973, upholding the right to abortion, was a violation of natural law.

"Roe v. Wade, which manufactured the right to kill the unborn, is perhaps the best example of where the natural law context of the Constitution has been most seriously offended," he said.[/b]

That's funny since abortion and infanticide are common in nature.

hezekiah jones · 12-10-2002, 12:42 PM

Christ, not this guy. Although I can't say I've ever read any of his articles, I've seen him many times impersonating a pundit on the cable news shows. He seems very shallow to me, which is either a function of the medium or else a necessary condition to being a "conservative intellectual" these days.

Clearly another Federalist Society poster boy for the Bush II era.

Clarence Thomas is into this "natural law" hocus pocus too, and spent some time discussing it at his nomination hearings. During those hearings, Thomas both backed away from his prior pronouncements on "natural law," simultaneously demonstrating that he didn't know what the hell he was talking about.

Ronald Dworkin, a bona fide intellectual who makes each of those chumps look like communications undergrads, wrote several articles about Thomas and his "natural law" gibberish in the New York Times several years ago, which unfortunately are not available online, but are collected in Dworkin's book, Freedom's Law.

Thomas, you will recall, was a law student at Yale at the time Roe v. Wade was announced, but had no recollection of ever having discussed the decision, which was an even more comical falsehood than his denial of ever having rented skin flicks.

Stephen Maturin · 12-10-2002, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by hezekiah jones:
<strong>Clearly another Federalist Society poster boy for the Bush II era.</strong>

Yeah, the pretty much sums it up.

<a href="http://edworkforce.house.gov/hearings/107th/fc/choice72302/kmiec.htm" target="_blank">Kmiec on School Vouchers</a>

<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-kmiec101101.shtml" target="_blank">Kmiec on Military Tribunals</a>

ybnormal · 12-10-2002, 03:50 PM

Clearly another Federalist Society poster boy for the Bush II era.

Indeed... and a great mouthpiece.

Quote:

<a href="http://law.utoledo.edu/Federalists/events.html" target="_blank"> Events of UTLAW Federalist Society (As of 8/29/02) </a>

October 4, 2002
Doug Kmiec, Dean of the Columbia Law School at Catholic University of America in Washington, DC will speak on "Can a Nation "under God" have religious freedom?"

Quote:

<a href="http://syninfo.com/ian/PRIVATE/2002/06/06/2002060607563446.html" target="_blank"> Townhall Conservative Alert - Message from The Heritage Foundation </a>

(fundraising email excerpt)
If we expect to make a difference on such a fundamental issue, we had better sweat the details. And we do. About a year ago we opened our Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. It's headed by Ed Meese, our Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow. A few days before the Supreme Court heard the Cleveland case, Ed held a moot court to help prepare the three attorneys who would defend the voucher program. All three, including Solicitor General Ted Olson, came to Heritage. In a closed session, they spent several hours being grilled by a panel of advocates who included Clint Bolick, director of litigation for the Institute for Justice; Doug Kmiec, a constitutional law expert and the new dean of the Catholic University School of Law; Mark Chopko, general counsel for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; and former appellate judge and independent counsel Ken Starr.

Quote:

<a href="http://publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu/faculty/kmiec/mpp606.htm" target="_blank"> Pepperdine - MPP 606 Spring 2000 Professor Douglas W. Kmiec </a>

Topic Selection Tips � How to select an excellent topic, write a brilliant paper, and be rewarded academically:

4. An excellent paper topic will contain:

a. A well-drafted thesis statement

b. A specific case, statute, or policy/cultural issue around which to conduct the analysis. It will be useful to attach the case, statute, or policy/cultural issue to the paper as an appendix. In looking for issues beyond those suggested above or to refine or narrow those suggested above (which is again very important), you may wish to consult the data bases of the Brookings Institute, the American Enterprise Institute, the CATO Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Institute for Justice, or perhaps, the following:
First Things; The Responsive Community; The Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy; The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy; Philosophy & Public Affairs; Law & Contemporary Problems; Notre Dame Law Review; Yale Law Journal; Journal of Law & Politics (Virginia); The Public Interest; The New Republic; The Weekly Standard; and National Review.

hezekiah jones · 12-10-2002, 04:08 PM

These are the people that are complaining about declining academic standards, and he's suggesting footnotes citing (approvingly, one would presume) First Things and ... The Weekly Standard??

Bonus marks for citing worldnetdaily.com and Creation Ex Nihilo.

Stephen Maturin · 12-19-2002, 10:14 AM

Here's a rather disturbing bit of <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1040263664973680793,00.html" target="_blank">unabashed self-promotion</a> from today's Wall Street Journal.

Toto · 12-19-2002, 10:34 AM

Quote:

The Times noted fairly that over my 25 years teaching law, I have "written about the need for judges to interpret the Constitution with an eye to what . . . scholars call 'natural law.'" Properly, the report traced this conviction not to a particular religious belief but to the country's fundamental incorporation document -- the Declaration of Independence.

It was my assumption that the average, well-informed citizen would find all this to be rather more basic than controversial, . . .

What about the Constitution?

So it's not controversial that this judge intends to roll back jurisprudence to -- I'm not even that old.

I intend to send a contribution to the Alliance for Justice to further their work in opposing him.

(Their press release is here

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-10-2002, 12:27 PM	#2
Undercurrent Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Santa Fe, NM Posts: 2,362	"Natural Law" is just an acadaemic-sounding term for "my opinion".

12-10-2002, 12:42 PM	#4
hezekiah jones Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: WI Posts: 4,357	Christ, not this guy. Although I can't say I've ever read any of his articles, I've seen him many times impersonating a pundit on the cable news shows. He seems very shallow to me, which is either a function of the medium or else a necessary condition to being a "conservative intellectual" these days. Clearly another Federalist Society poster boy for the Bush II era. Clarence Thomas is into this "natural law" hocus pocus too, and spent some time discussing it at his nomination hearings. During those hearings, Thomas both backed away from his prior pronouncements on "natural law," simultaneously demonstrating that he didn't know what the hell he was talking about. Ronald Dworkin, a bona fide intellectual who makes each of those chumps look like communications undergrads, wrote several articles about Thomas and his "natural law" gibberish in the New York Times several years ago, which unfortunately are not available online, but are collected in Dworkin's book, Freedom's Law. Thomas, you will recall, was a law student at Yale at the time Roe v. Wade was announced, but had no recollection of ever having discussed the decision, which was an even more comical falsehood than his denial of ever having rented skin flicks.

12-10-2002, 04:08 PM	#7
hezekiah jones Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: WI Posts: 4,357	These are the people that are complaining about declining academic standards, and he's suggesting footnotes citing (approvingly, one would presume) First Things and ... The Weekly Standard?? Bonus marks for citing worldnetdaily.com and Creation Ex Nihilo.

12-19-2002, 10:14 AM	#8
Stephen Maturin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Broomfield, Colorado, USA Posts: 1,295	Here's a rather disturbing bit of <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1040263664973680793,00.html" target="_blank">unabashed self-promotion</a> from today's Wall Street Journal.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.