Congratulations to VA’s new AG, Ken Cuccinelli who, to the best of my knowledge, becomes the first George Mason law school alumnus to be elected to state-wide office in Viriginia. He bested alumni of William & Mary and UVA in the primaries. GMU is a relatively young law school and this is a proud day for us.
-
Contact
-
Search
Stuff From Us
Categories
Archives
Blogroll
- 3 Jews, 4 Opinions
- Agoraphilia
- Althouse
- Andrew Sullivan
- Bainbridge
- Balkinization
- Becker-Posner
- Best of the Web
- Betsy's Page
- Blue Mass. Group
- Cal. App. Report
- Cal. Punitives
- CalPundit
- Cathy Young
- Chequer-Board
- Chicago Faculty Blog
- Concurring Opinions
- Conglomerate
- Copyrights & Campaigns
- CrimLaw
- Dan Drezner
- Dave Kopel
- David Frum
- Day by Day
- Deep Glamour
- Discourse.Net
- ecitsuJ
- Election Law
- Emmanuelle Richard
- Empirical Legal Studies
- Eric Muller
- Fed Soc Debates
- Former Chef
- GeekPress
- Gideon's Trumpet
- Gil Milbauer
- Hit & Run
- How Appealing
- InstaPundit
- Joanne Jacobs
- Jotwell
- KausFiles
- Knowledge Problem
- Language Log
- LawCulture
- Lawrence Solum
- Legal Planet
- Liberty & Power
- Lileks
- Marginal Revolution
- Marquette Faculty Blog
- Matt Welch
- Matt Yglesias
- Michael Barone
- Michael Dorf
- Neuroethics & Law Blog
- NoodleFood
- Opinio Juris
- OpinionJournal Federation
- Overlawyered
- OxBlog
- Point of Law
- PrawfsBlawg
- Reality-Based Community
- Reason
- Religion Clause
- Right Coast
- Room for Debate
- Rosenbergs
- ScrappleFace
- Secular Right
- Sentencing Law & Policy
- Sonia Arrison
- Stuart Buck
- Technology Liberation Front
- The Opening Brief
- The Torch
- Tom Palmer
- Truth on the Market
- U Chicago Law Faculty Blog
- Virginia Postrel
- Wonkette
- WSJ Law Blog
Meta
-
They're Listening . . . says:
Especially joyful news for those grads who agree getting a Social Security Number (for your seventh child, at least) is dangerous, because “it is being used to track you . . .” (see YouTube clip). The first six are expendable, maybe, but you need to have one off the grid to keep the blood line alive.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 8:42 amSmallholder says:
“My view is that homosexual acts, not homosexuality, but homosexual acts are wrong. They’re intrinsically wrong. And I think in a natural law based country it’s appropriate to have policies that reflect that. … They don’t comport with natural law. I happen to think that it represents (to put it politely; I need my thesaurus to be polite) behavior that is not healthy to an individual and in aggregate is not healthy to society.” — Cuccinelli
George Mason must be so proud.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 9:15 amA year later. says:
Todd, I would love to see you address your fear mongering post from a year ago about what would “certainly” happen after Obama was elected: http://volokh.com/posts/1225159469.shtml. Where’s the fairness doctrine? Where was the hasty retreat from Iraq? Where’s our backing out of free trade agreements? Where’s our increased taxes?
Quote
November 4, 2009, 10:00 amPaul Horwitz says:
It is churlish to withhold congratulations in the face of a major victory, and I tender mine quite happily. I will say that I know and worked with Steve Shannon and believe he is an honorable and capable man who would have served with distinction. The voters have spoken, and I have no complaint at all about that, just regrets; but I did want to put in a word for someone I know personally and respect greatly.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 10:26 amArthurKirkland says:
If the point is that any school attempting to make its mark should be proud of any election of any alumnus, point taken.
If the point is that Mr. Cuccinelli’s record and expressed views are something George Mason is proud of, that assertion reflects poorly on George Mason. In particular, I hope George Mason is not responsible for Mr. Cuccinelli’s view of ‘natural law.’
Quote
November 4, 2009, 10:43 amAthelstane says:
Mr. Cucinelli’s view of natural only suffers from the flaw of being a couple thousand years old — which is to say, as old as explicit thinking about the natural law itself happens to be.
It does not, however, comport with contemporary understandings which have emerged in many western countries over the last few decades.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 10:49 amDudeman says:
Yup, his views are so far outside the mainstream. So now chalk up Virginia and Maine in the column of backwards, regressive, unenlightened provinces (and those other 30 states as well.)
What is the defination of “mainstream” again?
Congratulations to Mr. Cuccinelli.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:05 amtroll_dc2 says:
It will be interesting to see how Mr. Cucinelli applies his personal views to government issues.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:06 amThey're Listening . . . says:
“It is churlish to withhold congratulations in the face of a major victory, and I tender mine quite happily.”
Why — assuming, at least, you aren’t his opponent? Happy congratulations irrespective of the candidate’s merits? That seems rash . . . there’s a difference between recognizing/acknowledging a victory, extending congratulations, and tendering them happily.
“The voters have spoken, and I have no complaint at all about that, just regrets”
There is a sense in which, if the candidate runs a fair and honest campaign, the problem has less to do with him or her than with the forces that converted a candidate into a successful candidate. I do think one can legitimately complain, though, about the quality of the judgment made by the voters, and by those who didn’t vote (given that turnout was probably around 40%). And I also think that there’s a judgment made by those who celebrate a victory that opens them up to complaint as well. See this post, and arguably your comment.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:42 amHans says:
On balance, Cuccinelli’s election was a good thing.
Ken Cuccinelli is much brighter than his opponent, Steve Shannon, who does not even know much about what the state attorney general’s office does.
In a recent debate, Shannon could not even name the divisions of the state attorney general’s office.
Cuccinelli voted against the large 2004 tax increase, which was sold to voters based on false pretenses (claims that the state faced a huge deficit, when it in fact recorded a budget surplus larger than the tax increase).
Cuccinelli also has been warning for years about the need to reform Virginia’s poorly-written mental health statutes, a warning whose rightness was borne out by the terrible Virginia Tech shooting tragedy.
And he provided a timely fix to the Melendez decision that kept scores of dangerous drunk drivers in jail.
Ken Cuccinelli wisely and successfully called for a special session of the legislature to fix the Commonwealth’s court rules to avoid having convictions needlessly thrown out, regardless of defendants’ guilt, based on the requirements of that decision. Because of a conflict between Virginia court rules and that decision, judges had begun throwing out the convictions of guilty drunk drivers.
Governor Kaine rightly agreed with Cuccinelli, and called the special session, but Steve Shannon wrongly blasted Cuccinelli for making this wise suggestion.
Cuccinelli prophetically anticipated the constitutional problems later found by the courts in the transportation tax bill, unlike Shannon and most other legislators.
Both of them voted for the bill originally, but Cuccinelli voted against it after it was revised to include provisions (regional transportation authority authorization provisons) that were later struck down in a 7-to-0 ruling by the state supreme court in Marshall v. Northern Virginia Regional Transportation Authority, as a violation of the principle of no taxation without representation.
My views on social issues are closer to Shannon’s than Cuccinelli’s, and I don’t agree with Cuccinelli’s “natural law” comments.
But I couldn’t vote for Shannon, because he failed to come up with legal solutions the way an aspiring attorney general should — and Cuccinelli did.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:53 amSteve says:
I like how Cuccinelli is better “on balance,” but then we get an unbalanced presentation of how he’s right about everything and his opponent was wrong about everything. Implying that the Virginia Tech shooting could have been stopped if only we had listened to Ken Cuccinelli seems to take the cake, though.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 12:13 pmRikiTiki says:
Hans — while all of those things you mention seem to indicate he is a better policy maker than the other candidates, I fail to see where George Mason Law contributed in any way to that. However, his untenable views on “natural law” seem to reflect more of what a law school might contribute to a candidate and sadly, that doesn’t reflect to kindly on George Mason Law.
What professor teaches Natural Law there again?
Quote
November 4, 2009, 12:16 pmArthurKirkland says:
So now chalk up Virginia and Maine in the column of backwards, regressive, unenlightened provinces (and those other 30 states as well.)
What is the defination of “mainstream” again?
Congratulations to Mr. Cuccinelli.
I must have missed the declarations of the residents of Virginia, Maine and other states that homosexuality is an abomination, that homosexual conduct should be unlawful, and that ‘natural law’ underlies these positions.
Mr. Cuccinelli bases his close-minded opinions on how the law should restrict others’ conduct on superstition, yet appears to be a cafeteria Catholic (professing reverence for ‘life in all its phases,’ yet aggressively promoting the death penalty). He is an ardent drug warrior and homophobe.
There is little to nothing “mainstream” about Mr. Cuccinelli, who espouses (apparently reflexively) extreme right-wing views that should repel moderates, liberals and libertarians.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 12:41 pmDon't Tread On Virginia says:
Congratulations to Attorney General-elect Cuccinelli! Mr. Cuccinelli noted that he would be the first GMU Law alum to be elected VA Attorney General when he spoke at GMU in Spring 2009.
He truly understands the meaning and importance of the 10th Amendment in protecting the sovereignty of Virginia from unconstitutional federal encroachment.
This is essential in a time when 99.9999999999% of what the federal government is doing is unconstitutional. We need someone to stand up to the advancing tyranny of the federal government against state sovereignty.
Mr. Cuccinelli is also a strong defender of private property rights when travesties like Kelo vs. New London are robbing citizens of their natural right to own private property without government encroachment.
Ken Cuccinelli for Attorney General (2nd term) 2013!
Ken Cuccinelli for Governor 2017!
Ken Cuccinelli for President 2020!
Quote
November 4, 2009, 1:16 pmVirginian says:
Yeah, he really repelled those moderates. I guess he would have gotten 75% of the votes if he wasn’t such an extreme right winger.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 1:20 pmsubpatre says:
The opening of the campaign was Cuccinelli’s warnings that Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts —requiring lab techs to testify— would create chaos in Virginia’s courts, where lab techs are not required to testify. Cuccinelli called for a special session of the legislature to amend Va. law to comply with the ruling.
Nice fellow he may be, Shannon labeled Cuccinelli’s warning “a [public relations] stunt that would cost taxpayers money.” and his campaign manager went farther, claiming Cuccinelli was “attempting to cover his weak record on drunken driving laws.”
In the end, Virginia’s laws did need to be amended. Not much, but you can’t deny defendant’s right to confront lab results when SCOTUS says otherwise.
Though there are numerous other areas in the campaign (gun rights, predator laws, etcetera) every legal or technical instance that arose —from AG divisions to the death penalty process— Cuccinelli was right and Shannon was wrong.
GMU teaches law, not personal beliefs, and no matter your preference in the Va AG race, GMU should be proud of Cuccinelli’s legal insight.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 1:21 pmHans Bader says:
Ken Cuccinelli proved prior to election day that he was abundantly qualified for the job of state attorney general, in terms of legal acumen.
As subpatre notes above, he was right to make crucial fixes to Virginia law to prevent chaos in handling drunk driving prosecutions in the aftermath of the Melendez decision — crucial fixes that his opponent mistakenly opposed.
The claim by Cuccinelli’s detractors that his views overall were “out of the mainstream” or would “repel moderates” are hard to square with the fact that Cuccinelli handily won the moderate areas of Virginia which went for Obama a year ago, like the large suburban counties of Loudoun County (where Cuccinelli got 59% of the vote), Prince William County (where he got 56% of the vote) and Henrico (where he got 56% of the vote).
It seems like the moderate soccer moms liked him.
As I noted in my comment above, his astute handling of state constitutional, tax, and mental health issues also provided perfectly “mainstream” reasons for voting for him.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 1:33 pmlosantiville says:
Social Security Numbers and homosexual acts.
Having a widespread search key like an SSN does reduce privacy (particularly when it is used more like a password than an account number). Modern crypto can let you prove account relationships (when you want to) without supplying any open id info. You could (for example) prove the possession of valid license without showing a license.
Half the population (probably higher in Virginia) believe that homosexual activity is immoral. Including circa 70% of Republicans and 70% of African Americans. So the new AG is not extreme in that view. Perhaps he’s just trying to pursue the Black vote.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 2:00 pmTodd Zywicki says:
A Year Later:
Here was Pete duPont’s full list:
By my count, duPont’s predictions are actually pretty accurate, especially considering that we’re less than a year into the administration. Spending has already increased immensely. Health care reform certainly contemplates new taxes. On protectionism, we’ve already slapped massive tariffs on imports of Chinese tires (at the behest of labor unions). The power of labor unions already have risen dramatically as evidenced by Chrysler and card-check is still a priority of the administration. And regulation is set to expand dramatically, most obviously on the financial industry, but also through cap-and-trade.
So far duPont is wrong on Iraq (as far as I know) and the Fairness Doctrine. But I’m not aware that Obama has come out affirmatively opposed to the Fairness Doctrine, has he?
On some of these issues, such as spending and kowtowing to labor unions, he far exceeded I think what even the most extreme scare-monger would have predicted about what would happen.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 2:27 pmJames T. Carrington says:
Hey Ken, you should update your screenname...
Quote
November 4, 2009, 2:57 pmSteve says:
But I’m not aware that Obama has come out affirmatively opposed to the Fairness Doctrine, has he?
Oh for the love of Christ!!!
Quote
November 4, 2009, 3:04 pmCrunchy Frog says:
First the Final Four, now this!
They’re taking over, I tell ya!
It’s a conspiracy!
Quote
November 4, 2009, 3:29 pmzippypinhead says:
It may be a bit premature to rewrite GMU’s marketing materials to feature Ken Cuccinelli. He’s been very effective in some areas, is photogenic, polished in public, isn’t afraid of a good fight, and is an absolute master at getting media attention. But over the years he also introduced a fair amount of wacky legislation that appeared intended only to get headlines (e.g., proposing to amend the 14th Amendment to revoke citizenship of U.S.-born children whose parents were illegal aliens; declaring that the inability to speak English is employment “misconduct” for which unemployment compensation may be withheld). Many of those bills failed to get even a single cosponsor and eventually died without a whimper in committee. If Cuccinelli uses the A.G.‘s office to advance that sort of divisive social agenda and ends up harming the prestige of the Commonwealth in the process, Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling (who wisely decided to seek re-election this time rather than challenge Bob McDonnell for the Republican gubenatorial nod) isn’t going to have a lot to worry about in the 2013 Republican primary.
On the bright side, I’m 100% certain that Cuccinelli will have no difficulty following up on McDonnell’s public warning to Michael Bloomberg, and indicting Bloomberg and his henchmen if he ever again sends MAIG investigators back to Virginia to attempt straw purchaser stings of Virginia firearms dealers.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 6:02 pmArthurKirkland says:
Some may dream that a close-minded panderer whose bigotry is rooted in a fairy tale may be a serious candidate for president in a decade, but they are people unfamiliar with young Americans or with the continuing trajectory of American progress. The racism, homophobia and religious dogma older Americans were steeped in (and for which too many still pine) is ridiculed by today’s college and high school students. As America progresses, arguing for making homosexual conduct unlawful will be as acceptable as an argument for racially segregated drinking fountains are today. Cuccinelli’s position on drugs will be treated in the manner in which Carrie Nation’s position on beer is regarded today. Cuccinelli’s views are on the wrong side of American history. I think that may be what bothers those who think like him (and recognize the tide’s direction) most.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 9:15 pmDavid Nieporent says:
Nothing in that proposal “revoked” anybody’s citizenship.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 10:55 pmDr. Weevil says:
ArthurKirkland calls religion “a fairy tale” while accusing other people of “bigotry”. Pot, meet kettle.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:27 pmsubpatre says:
To expand, where Zippypinhead claims “proposing to amend the 14th Amendment to revoke citizenship of U.S.-born children whose parents were illegal aliens”
The bill not only does not “revoke citizenship”, it would resolve a problem by urging “the United States Congress . . . to clarify specifically that a person [such as President Obama] born to a parent who is a U. S. Citizen is also a citizen of the United States”
Zippypinhead alleges another of Cuccinelli’s bills was ‘declaring that the inability to speak English is employment misconduct’
It is true, if “. . . an employee’s inability or refusal to speak English at the workplace, in violation of a known policy of the employer, . . .” Currently, firing someone for refusal to speak English —no matter what work policies are— earns them full unemployment benefits. A big “thank you” to Ken Cuccinelli from taxpayers and small businesses alike.
It’s fascinating that Zippypinhead’s misrepresentations lead toward a conclusion of pettiness and meanness, when in fact Cuccinelli’s proposals are the exact opposite; they are clear and fair.
________
Dr. W — Please don’t feed the frothy-mouth troll
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:41 pmanynonyno says:
Why does this blog so frequently praise the achievements of people associated with GMU Law? I don’t see Eugene Volokh frequently posting about what people from UCLA Law have done lately, or Orin Kerr telling us all about whatever GWU Law should be proud of right now. I find this GMU Law cheerleading quite irritating. Particularly the idea that a schmuck like Ken Cuccinelli is someone of whom his alma mater should be proud. I’d be embarrassed if he had gone to my alma mater.
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:44 pmA year later. says:
Todd, does that mean you’ll be doing a post on the predictions?
Quote
November 4, 2009, 11:58 pmArthurKirkland says:
I amend my comment about the apparent basis for much of Mr. Cuccinelli’s extremist view of the world by replacing “a fairy tale” with “superstition.”
Quote
November 5, 2009, 12:53 amGuessed says:
If this is a proud moment for GMU, it must be an especially proud moment for Regent, given that its grad was elected governor.
So Regent»»GMU>Wm Mary and UVA? Or maybe we limit this quality and pride measure to head-to-head races, to preserve its scientific credibility.
Quote
November 5, 2009, 9:08 amTodd Zywicki says:
anynonyno: Actually I think that Eugene routinely touts achievements by Bruins (such as when Kirsten Gillibrand was named to the Senate) and Orin routinely touts achievements by his students (such as Supreme Court clerkships). I don’t see anything wrong with this and I think we all have the right to be proud of our institutions’ achievements.
Quote
November 5, 2009, 10:05 amzippypinhead says:
subpatre, before dissing other folks’ comments, you might want to actually look at the links they provide. The full-text of Cuccinelli’s bill proposing a Constitutional Convention and citizenship-limiting modification to the 14th Amendment is linked from the bill’s summary. Cuccinelli’s goal was to change the 14th Amendment so that ONLY children of citizens can automatically be U.S. citizens. From the full-text of his legislation:
Res Ipsa Loquitur. He wasn’t able to attract any cosponsors for this bill, and it died a quick, quiet and well-deserved death in committee. Like I said above, if GMU’s current favorite grad uses the A.G.‘s office to advance that sort of divisive social agenda, Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling isn’t going to have a lot to worry about in the 2013 Republican gubernatorial primary.
Quote
November 5, 2009, 2:59 pmsubpatre says:
Zippypinhead wrote: “subpatre, before dissing other folks’ comments, you might want to actually look at the links they provide. The full-text of Cuccinelli’s bill proposing a Constitutional Convention and citizenship-limiting modification to the 14th Amendment is linked from the bill’s summary.”
The proposal was to grant citizenship to all people born to a citizen parent —like President Obama— or those naturalized. So indeed, your previous claim of a proposal “to amend the 14th Amendment to revoke citizenship” is a pure and simple lie. Thanks for the clarification.
Quote
November 5, 2009, 5:57 pmzippypinhead says:
Subpatre
Not at all. Unless you’re a member of the rapidly-dwindling cadre of die-hard “birthers,” it’s pretty clear that under the CURRENT 14th Amendment, the President is a natural-born citizen regardless of the citizenship of his parents. At the time of Ken Cucinelli’s Constitutional Convention proposal, some commentators opined that in the unlikely event the 14th Amendment was changed as Cucinelli was advocating, persons who were born in the U.S. to non-citizens would likely be unable to continue to claim the benefits of citizenship on a going-forward basis without affirmatively being naturalized. Something Cucinelli didn’t disagree with in his own public blatherings at the time. So yeah, that’s effectively revoking the citizenship of children of illegal aliens.
My point: If he takes policy positiions this extreme as Virginia A.G., his political career is going to be rather self-limiting. And GMU might be a wee bit embarrassed to tout his law school alumnus status too loudly...
There are a number of other rather extreme (not conservative, but extreme) positions Cucinelli has advocated over the years. Some of them are reprised here. Let’s hope he takes a lesson from Bob McDonnell’s pragmatic campaign and moderate post-election statements, and resists the temptation to push some of his more divisive, non-mainstream views from his new perch in the A.G.‘s office.
Quote
November 5, 2009, 7:10 pmsubpatre says:
Zippypinhead says:. . . some commentators opined that . . . So yeah, that’s effectively revoking the citizenship of children of illegal aliens.
...only if the word ‘effectively’ means “in Zippypinhead’s imagination” or “because I’m a progressive and make crap up”; which it does not. In addition, according to your own source, there weren’t any “some commentators” either. The citations are curiously absent. [And another example why wiki can’t be trusted]
There was no citizenship revocation proposed. Zippypinhead lied.
Quote
November 5, 2009, 11:55 pmzippypinhead says:
Hey, sub... I generally don’t respond to Trolls, but in this case, I’ll make an exception. You should be honored.
You obviously don’t understand, or refuse to acknowledge, what Ken Cuccinelli’s Constitutional Convention proposal intended — he wanted to REPLACE the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (“All persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States”) with an entirely new definition of citizenship that would disqualify individuals born in the United States to non-citizen parents (“All persons born to at least one parent who is already a US Citizen or who are naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States”).
Now that may be fine with you, but remember, that clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted for the express purpose of overruling the Dred Scott decision. A case you might have heard of, perhaps?
Now maybe you don’t care whether the Commonwealth’s new Attorney General — a GMU law grad — proposed to repeal a core part of the Amendment that overruled the most infamous decision in Supreme Court history, and that’s OK — it’s a free country. But I repeat, as a friend of GMU and resident of Cuccinelli’s state senate district — Cuccinelli is not somebody that GMU law school really should be touting as one of its most prominent alumni, at least not until he develops a track record a bit less flaky than some of his legislative antics.
Further Affiant Sayeth Not
Quote
November 6, 2009, 12:16 pmsubpatre says:
Sure as shooting, Todd’s post about Cuccinelli as the first GMU alumnus elected statewide turned into a spit-fest by the election’s losers.
Zippypinhead chimed in, claiming Cuccinelli had proposed “to amend the 14th Amendment to revoke citizenship of U.S.-born children whose parents were illegal aliens”. It isn’t true.
The merits of the actual, underlying proposal is now immaterial. What is significant is there was no “revocation”, no ‘revoking clause’. It is Zippypinhead’s sour grapes making a false claim.
Quote
November 7, 2009, 12:34 am