pageok
pageok
pageok
Just A Random Thought:
A hypothetical news story reporting that John Yoo authored an OLC memo rejecting the individual rights view of the Second Amendment would cause the entire blogosphere, both left and right, to instantly explode.
Dan Simon (mail) (www):
We can only hope...
1.16.2008 2:36pm
Gregory Conen (mail):
The libertarians would be happy, though.
1.16.2008 2:37pm
Dave N (mail):
Perhaps causing the extermination of all life as we know it.
1.16.2008 2:38pm
Stephen Aslett (mail):
Given Yoo's expansive views on executive power, wouldn't a view of the Second Amendment that allows for heavy government regulation of private ownership of firearms be entirely consistent?
1.16.2008 2:49pm
Thales (mail) (www):
I propose that someone sue him requesting an injunction to prevent just such a memorandum. Then he could come out in support of prior restraint and the plaintiff's work would be done for him.
1.16.2008 3:00pm
Don de Drain:
On a related note, I wonder what would happen if the White House annouced that, based on the President's inherent powers (as Commander in Chief etc.), income taxes were going to be raised 10% accross the board in order to pay for the GWOT. After all, if the Prez can ignore the 4th Amendment, he should be able to ignore the part of the Constitution dealing with the levying of taxes.
1.16.2008 3:14pm
Tony Tutins (mail):
Like Rip Van Winkle, I would think Janet Reno were still AG. On that subject: would Hillary bring Janet Reno back as AG? Despite its many faults, the Bush White House has been admirably free of children abducted at machine gunpoint, government destruction of religious communes, and sniper killing of dogs and housewives.
1.16.2008 3:20pm
Thales (mail) (www):
Tony Tutins: Just wanted to point out that the Ruby Ridge fiasco did not occur under Bill Clinton . . .
1.16.2008 3:52pm
Bill Poser (mail) (www):

Despite its many faults, the Bush White House has been admirably free of children abducted at machine gunpoint, government destruction of religious communes, and sniper killing of dogs and housewives.

Not really. The difference between Bush and Clinton is that Bush does it on a larger scale but in Iraq.
1.16.2008 3:53pm
McGrath (mail):
Tony Tutins: You must not live in DC. We had a little problem with snipers in 2002.
1.16.2008 3:54pm
OrinKerr:
Despite its many faults, the Bush White House has been admirably free of children abducted at machine gunpoint, government destruction of religious communes, and sniper killing of dogs and housewives.


There has also been a notable absence of individuals refusing to comply with the lawful authority of the United States pursuant to court orders, thus avoiding the question of whether the government should let people defy federal court orders or should force compliance with them.
1.16.2008 3:58pm
anonthu:
We had a little problem with snipers in 2002.

I didn't realize Muhammed and Malvo were FBI...
1.16.2008 4:05pm
Bruce:
would cause the entire blogosphere, both left and right, to instantly explode

And that would be a bad thing because...?
1.16.2008 4:08pm
Tony Tutins (mail):
Dang Thales, you're right. But the investigation into what happened was on her watch. What was the outcome, would you happen to know?
1.16.2008 4:09pm
r78:
Actually,I think such a memo would be perfectly consistent with Yoo's legal philosophy, if you can call it that.

If the unitary executive has the power to disregard laws and treaties, why wouldn't it also have the power to prevent citizens from having firearms - regardless of whatever that constitution says.

Following Katrina, the people seizing guns weren't a bunch of lefty tree-huggers - it was the government and specifically the police and national guard.
1.16.2008 4:10pm
Eddie Haskell:


Despite its many faults, the Bush White House has been admirably free of children abducted at machine gunpoint, government destruction of religious communes, and sniper killing of dogs and housewives.




Not really. The difference between Bush and Clinton is that Bush does it on a larger scale but in Iraq.


So our troops in Iraq are abducting scores of children, destroying numerous religious communes, and sniper killing dozens of housewives?

But you support the troops, right?
1.16.2008 4:12pm
Thales (mail) (www):
"There has also been a notable absence of individuals refusing to comply with the lawful authority of the United States pursuant to court orders, thus avoiding the question of whether the government should let people defy federal court orders or should force compliance with them."

Wow, snarky (but completely accurate w/r/t the described incidents). This is the reason I have trouble mustering much sympathy for the Waco/Ruby Ridge/Elian Gonzalez anger crowd.
1.16.2008 4:20pm
DJR:

There has also been a notable absence of individuals refusing to comply with the lawful authority of the United States pursuant to court orders, thus avoiding the question of whether the government should let people defy federal court orders or should force compliance with them.


Sure, but there has been plenty of the government refusing to comply with court orders, so that pretty much makes up for it.
1.16.2008 4:29pm
DJR:

Waco/Ruby Ridge/Elian Gonzalez

/black helicopters/NAFTA Highway/9-11 Conspiracy/Trilateral Commission/...
1.16.2008 4:32pm
Zathras (mail):
Whether he believes in an individual rights viewpoint or not, he probably believes that any such right on the whims of the unitary executive, and as such all guns could be confiscated during wartime by executive order.
1.16.2008 4:45pm
SmokeandAshes (mail):
r78 - I didn't realize that the Bush Administration ordered the confiscation of guns in New Orleans. Care to provide some proof of the spurious accusation?
1.16.2008 4:53pm
Al Maviva (mail):
No doubt he also believes the Unitary Executive Theory supports the Designated Hitter, the Coca Cola's continuing use of blended puppies in its "secret" recipe, mind control sattelites, and speaking of that the ongoing operation of Dennis Kucinich's body, which does dual duty as a presidential candidate, and the Martian embassy.

I mean as long as you're going to read all of your delusional fantasies into into that all-encompassing talisman, Unitary Executive Theory, you might as well be generous and read everybody else's in there too, right?
1.16.2008 4:56pm
Eli Rabett (www):
One of these days ... a guy is going to come up to you and show you a nice brand-new deck of cards on which the seal is not yet broken, and this guy is going to offer to bet you that he can make the Jack of Spades jump out of the deck and squirt cider in your ear. But, son, do not bet this man, for as sure as you are standing there, you are going to end up with an earful of cider. - Damon Runyon
1.16.2008 5:28pm
Brian K (mail):
the Coca Cola's continuing use of blended puppies in its "secret" recipe

i always wondered what made coke taste good. yuummm...puppy
1.16.2008 5:34pm
WHOI Jacket:
That's like dividing by zero.
1.16.2008 5:37pm
Milhouse (www):

On that subject: would Hillary bring Janet Reno back as AG?

Maybe. But Rudy wouldn't have to bring Reno back as AG; he's her GOP equivalent. (And Spitzer is his Democrat identical twin, but that's another story.)
1.16.2008 5:39pm
Fub:
Al Maviva wrote at 1.16.2008 4:56pm:
No doubt he also believes the Unitary Executive Theory supports the Designated Hitter, the Coca Cola's continuing use of blended puppies in its "secret" recipe, mind control sattelites, and speaking of that the ongoing operation of Dennis Kucinich's body, which does dual duty as a presidential candidate, and the Martian embassy.
Uh oh. Looks like the Coca Cola Bottling company will have to do some 'splaining to Professor Reynolds.
1.16.2008 5:49pm
SomeFella (mail):
Silly people this theory of the unitary executive isn't real. It's just one of those things made up to scare little kids, like the bogeyman and Michael Jackson.
1.16.2008 6:31pm
Andrew Janssen (mail):

On that subject: would Hillary bring Janet Reno back as AG?


Highly unlikely; I doubt Reno would agree to come back given that her Parkinson's disease has had 8 years to progress since Clinton left office.
1.16.2008 9:30pm
r78:

r78 - I didn't realize that the Bush Administration ordered the confiscation of guns in New Orleans. Care to provide some proof of the spurious accusation?

What I said was:


Following Katrina, the people seizing guns weren't a bunch of lefty tree-huggers - it was the government and specifically the police and national guard.



But you did get to use "spurious" in a sentence.
1.16.2008 11:32pm
Bob from Ohio (mail):

There has also been a notable absence of individuals refusing to comply with the lawful authority of the United States pursuant to court orders, thus avoiding the question of whether the government should let people defy federal court orders or should force compliance with them.


So the three incidents were to encourage the others, like Admiral Byng? I guess it worked.

Those children at Waco, how were they defying "lawful" orders?

Are all "lawful" orders moral?
1.17.2008 12:45pm