pageok
pageok
pageok
McCain's "Justice Advisory Committee":

It has a bunch of law professors, including the VC's own Orin and Eugene. Here's a riddle: There are more law professors on this committee from George ___ Law School than from any other law school. Fill in the blank. Answer after the jump. Hat tip: Overlawyered.

(show)

Gu (mail):
George Mason
5.6.2008 10:55pm
Dan M.:
George Kennedy
5.6.2008 10:58pm
Jim at FSU (mail):
George Jefferson.
5.6.2008 11:02pm
OrinKerr:
Jetson? Oh, wait, I should have known this one.
5.6.2008 11:05pm
Dave N (mail):
They named a law school after the current President?
5.6.2008 11:16pm
wt (www):
Oh man. I guessed George Clinton and Parliament- Funkadelic University. In retrospect, that was a poor choice.
5.6.2008 11:18pm
llamasex (mail) (www):
Well that explains alot... Corruption whithin the blogosphere. A little blobribe for a little blegdorsment.
5.6.2008 11:18pm
Jim at FSU (mail):
Associate Justice Janice Rogers Brown. I like the sound of that.
5.6.2008 11:23pm
kadet (mail):
well, Orin and Eugene, your services will not be needed.
McCain will not be a president
5.6.2008 11:30pm
LM (mail):
Jim at FSU,

Associate Justice Janice Rogers Brown. I like the sound of that.

Please go post that on Kos and Huffington Post. It may clear up an internecine feud we liberals have gotten a little carried away with.
5.6.2008 11:30pm
Wahoowa:

Associate Justice Janice Rogers Brown. I like the sound of that.



be still my beating heart
5.6.2008 11:34pm
alkali (mail):
"Of The Jungle"?
5.6.2008 11:38pm
Terrivus:
well, Orin and Eugene, your services will not be needed. McCain will not be a president

Zing! And [sic]!
5.6.2008 11:41pm
darelf:
The comments on the hotline blog listing ( which includes Trent Lott and Fred Thompson, ? ) are ... precious. They're so cute with their pretending to be grown ups.
5.6.2008 11:48pm
SIG357:
Orwell?
5.6.2008 11:59pm
Dave Hardy (mail) (www):
George Washington, obviously.
5.7.2008 12:19am
Annie Mouse:
Yes, but Michael Abramowicz migrated to George Washington from George Mason.
5.7.2008 12:23am
Lester Hunt (mail) (www):
Congrats Orin and Eugene. I guess I'll have to rethink my attitude toward McCain, which until now has been one of monotonous loathing relieved only by twinges of hatred.
5.7.2008 12:38am
Hoosier:
George of the Jungle (?)
5.7.2008 12:56am
Paul Milligan (mail) (www):
George, King of England ? Georgie Porgie ?

But , seriously, folks - maybe with advice like that, President McCain will at least stay on the straight and narrow on the 2 things I hope for from him - SCOTUS / judges, and the 2nd Amendment.
5.7.2008 2:42am
Oren:
Associate Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Unless you have information that Pat Leahy is going to die soon, that's about as likely as Associate Justice Reinhardt.
5.7.2008 3:25am
Jim at FSU (mail):
A lot can happen in the next 8 years. I didn't say I needed it by next Monday.
5.7.2008 10:47am
Prufrock765 (mail):
George Carlin School of Law
5.7.2008 11:56am
gab:
The blind leading the halt.
5.7.2008 12:38pm
EKGlen (mail):
So the Bush administration drew heavily from Liberty University School of Law and the McCain administration intends to rely on the talent pool of George Mason?
5.7.2008 1:41pm
DavidBernstein (mail):
EK, is it really too much effort for you to click on the "show" link before posting?
5.7.2008 1:51pm
Jim at FSU (mail):
One thing that bothers me about that list is the sheer number of people on it. McCain can probably find a supporter or two in that list for nearly any nominee he wants. It seems specifically crafted to appeal to every possible Republican constituency at once so long as none of them find out about the other 40 people on the list that don't share their views. They will all look at the cliff notes version featuring their 6 favorite members and say "ooh John McCain really gets it."
5.7.2008 1:51pm
EKGlen (mail):
corrected:

So the Bush administration drew heavily from Liberty University School of Law and the McCain administration intends to rely on the talent pool of George Washington?
5.7.2008 1:58pm
MXE (mail):
George, Curious
5.7.2008 2:13pm
sbron:
Why would libertarian law professors support a candidate who favors racial/gender preferences? Why would libertarians support McCain when he wants mass immigration supported by a welfare state?
5.7.2008 2:41pm
wm13:
sbron, it's probably a lesser of two evils thing. This is admittedly kind of a mature concept for some people.
5.7.2008 3:14pm
jabroni:
sbron, perhaps you could enlighten us as to why libertarians would support whatever big government measures you would propose (fences, massive enforcement agencies, etc.) for dealing with an otherwise efficient outcome (movement of labor to where it is needed). It sounds to me like McCain is the one closer to libertarianism here.
5.7.2008 3:49pm
Trevor Morrison (mail):
Maybe Orin or Eugene or someone else on the good Senator's advisory committee could advise him on the correct spelling of Justices' names. From the text of McCain's recent speech, as presented on his website:

"And yet when President Bill Clinton nominated Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsberg to serve on the high court . . ."

Nice.
5.7.2008 4:05pm
sbron:
The problem is that the taxpayer is subsidizing the movement of said labor by massive educational and welfare spending for immigrants and their children.

1. Title 1 federal funding for schools with predominately immigrant and children of immigrant students.

2. Free breakfast and lunch at such schools.

3. Free health care via Medicaid, Medi-cal in California and local health clinics. e.g. County clinics in California and the city-run clinics in San Francisco.

4. Free transportation provided by the State of California at over 200 mil./year for ag workers.

5. Welfare payments for citizen children of illegal immigrants.

6. Food stamps for legal immigrants and children of legal/illegal immigrants, both Federal and state programs such as WIC in California.

7. Affirmative action for legal Latino immigrants who become citizens and their US-born children. AA is a tax on ethnic/racial groups who are not eligible for such preferences.

8. Extra costs for bilingual/multicultural education in public schools.

9. Between 30% to 40% of illegal aliens are not working according to various estimates, imposing even further costs on a strained welfare system.

As Milton Friedman observed, the modern welfare state is incompatible with mass immigration of poorly educated, low-skilled laborers.

I have an idea -- why not pay U.S. citizens 50$ per hour to design and build machines to harvest the lettuce that McCain says we won't pick for the same wage. Mechanization and automation would greatly reduce the need for low-skilled immigration, increase the tax base and aid social cohesion.
5.7.2008 4:13pm
jabroni:
1.) It sounds to me like your problem is with the welfare state, not immigration.

2.) With the exception of California, which is a neo-socialist state, I doubt that these costs outweigh the benefits. McCain is from a border state. If the situation were really all doom and gloom, don't you think he would have difficulty getting releected year after year? Yet this border state has continually elected him by wide margins, while rejecting those that have taken a hardline stance on immigration (see, e.g., J.D. Hayworth, an otherwise outstanding Congressman). That has to tell you something.
5.7.2008 4:31pm
jabroni:
the modern welfare state is incompatible with mass immigration of poorly educated, low-skilled laborers.

I agree. So does Congress, which is why the passed a law in the mid-90s prohibiting federal aid during an immigrant's first 5 years in the country. People are not coming here to receive federal aid.

Maybe they are coming here for state aid. If so, that cuts in favor of tossing California's lefty government and running the state like Texas or Arizona. It does not tell me much about who should be president.
5.7.2008 4:35pm
sbron:

People are not coming here to receive federal aid.


No, they are coming to receive federal and state aid for their children. Understandable, since Mexico does not even offer high school in most rural areas, but the result is a tremendous cost to the US taxpayer.

If the children of immigrants from Latin America were taking full advantage of educational opportunities, and not demanding AA preferences, I think the immigration argument would be much less nasty. But Latino students drop out at a 50% rate in California, and have literally rioted at campuses such as UCLA for preferences and ethnic studies curricula.

As an example of such ingratitude and intolerance of immigrants who are not "Raza", Latino students at UCLA demanded that Schoenberg Plaza be renamed "Plaza Aztlan", and questioned why Schoenberg was worthy of such recognition. Schoenberg's son had to write a letter to the LA Times explaining his father's plight as a refugee in the 30s, and how he contributed greatly to the teaching of music composition at UCLA.
5.7.2008 5:00pm
LM (mail):
He was also brilliant, groundbreaking composer in his own right.
5.7.2008 5:53pm
SIG357:
McCain is from a border state. If the situation were really all doom and gloom, don't you think he would have difficulty getting releected year after year?

I'm pretty sure that McCain does not have to face the voters "year after year". The House, where the members do have the face the voters every two years, is noticably less gung-ho about open borders than the Senate.


Yet this border state has continually elected him by wide margins, while rejecting those that have taken a hardline stance on immigration (see, e.g., J.D. Hayworth, an otherwise outstanding Congressman). That has to tell you something.


Well, it tells me that you're not much of a political analyst. The guy who replaced Hayworth ran as a hardliner on immigration, for instance.
5.7.2008 7:13pm
SIG357:
sbron, perhaps you could enlighten us as to why libertarians would support whatever big government measures you would propose (fences, massive enforcement agencies, etc.) for dealing with an otherwise efficient outcome (movement of labor to where it is needed). It sounds to me like McCain is the one closer to libertarianism here.


I can give you a great many reasons, but the biggest one is that your so-called efficent movement of labor, aka illegal immigration, is populating America with people who are as far from libertarianism as you can get. I saw one study in which Hispanic Republicans expressed a greater eagerness for bigger government than did white Democrats.

The upshot of this absurd open borders fetish can only be a socialist America. Of course, thats the desired goal of most of those who defend it. There is NOTHING in libertarianism which justifies this nonsense.
5.7.2008 7:19pm
SIG357:
it's probably a lesser of two evils thing.

Nobody is compelled to vote for one of the candidates the Democrats and Republicans offer. Believe it or not, they don't have a divine right to share all political power in America between them.
5.7.2008 7:22pm
LM (mail):
Sig,

Your justification for the otherwise anti-libertarian practice of closed borders is pragmatic, but when it comes to voting, you reject "lesser of evils" pragmatism. It sounds like the unifying factor is what (or who) you find most objectionable. You don't like illegal immigrants and you don't like John McCain. Ideological rationales proceed backward from there.
5.7.2008 8:13pm
Nunzio:
Instead of candidates saying "If elected, I would appoint justices in the mold of ___" why not just give a list of a half dozen people you think would be outstanding justices?

Given that all 9 current justices were federal appeals judges, it would be pretty easy to name 6 court of appeals judges you think would be very good so the rest of us would have a solid idea.
5.7.2008 9:13pm
M. Simon (mail) (www):
Eugene,

Have you discussed with McCain or presented a paper on the costs of the drug war (liberty and $$$) and some incremental moves to reduce those costs?

I note Bush has reigned in Federal Drug Task forces with out much of a holler. What could McCain do along those lines?
5.7.2008 10:45pm
Mary Katherine Day-Petrano (mail):
This is great news, and more Kudos to Orin and Eugene, but Obama is going to win the Presidency!
5.9.2008 3:18am