From the WSJ (subscribers only, so I’ll quote at length):
In his two years on the appeals bench, Supreme Court nominee John Roberts has authored about 40 opinions, but it’s a one-and-a-half page dissent that has Ted Kennedy fulminating. The Senator from Massachusetts is outraged about a Commerce Clause case called Rancho Viejo v. Norton, which, in the Kennedy legal interpretation, threatens “Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage” and the environment. Is that all?
In Rancho Viejo, a real-estate company challenged the Interior Department’s application of the Endangered Species Act to halt a project that might disturb an endangered species known as the arroyo Southwestern toad, whose picture we publish nearby. At issue was Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce—in this case, the movement of the toad, which, as Judge Roberts pointed out, is entirely intrastate. The toad is a homebody; it does not travel out of California.
It’s a long hop from the arroyo toad to Social Security or the minimum wage, and we confess to some difficulty in following Senator Kennedy’s line of reasoning. Nor do we agree that the interpretation of the Commerce Clause is “settled,” as he asserts. If anything, the Supreme Court confused matters in the past term.
Judge Roberts said that federal regulation of the toad appeared to be “inconsistent” with Lopez, the 1995 case in which the Supreme Court ruled that gun possession near a school did not constitute economic activity. But he was writing in 2003—before last term’s controversial Raich decision, in which a 6-3 Court seemed to retreat from Lopez in saying that federal law can trump state laws permitting the possession of marijuana for medical use.
Also worth noting is that Judge Roberts’s four-paragraph dissent was not a full-fledged opinion on the merits of Rancho Viejo; he was merely disagreeing with the majority’s decision to deny a review of the case by the full court. This makes Mr. Kennedy’s denunciation of the “sweeping implications” of Judge Roberts’s words even more dishonest.
One final quote from Mr. Kennedy on Judge Roberts: “I can imagine few things worse for our seniors, for the disabled, for workers and for families than to place someone on the highest court in the land who would put these protections at risk.”
Barring surprises, the debate over Judge Roberts’s confirmation is widely expected not to be rancorous. But judging from Senator Kennedy’s opening salvo, it won’t be because he wants it that way.
I don’t know what’s more frightening—the gigantic leaps in logic Kennedy is forced to deploy in order to muster this level of sweeping outrage, or that Kennedy and Scalia seem to be on the same side in Raich…
(h/t Terry Hastings)
Ah, good, they dug up R. Viejo v. Norton, possibly the most ridiculous stretch of the commerce clause in the last 50 years. And that’s sayin’ something, boy.
Did you catch Penn & Teller’s “Bullshit!” show? Total evisceration of the Endangered Species act…
Haven’t seen it. Waiting for it to come out on DVD. I don’t get…Showtime, is it?
*Barring surprises, the debate over Judge Roberts’s confirmation is widely expected not to be rancorous.*
Haha, says who ? We keep waiting for the majority of democrats to act like sane decent human beings. Every time there’s a governmental issue, we think to ourselves “They can’t possibly find a way to tie Issue X in with Abu Ghiraib, Haliburton, War for Oil and Gitmo” and yet, each and every time, the left’s “creative thinkers” like Mssr. Kennedy roll out this week’s insanity laced talking points.
Expecting Roberts to be confirmed without another knock down drag out fight (no matter which one of the democratic senators McCain is fellating this week), you have not been paying attention to politics for the last 10 years.
Yup.
(/Randolph Scott)
http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/home.do
I hate to post anything with the appearance of a Kennedy defense – and this is intended as an indictment, not validation – but I don’t think the old Mass has what it takes to actually do anything like real research, let alone read through and check much of what his crack young staff of moonbats puts together for him. I’m surprised he can read a speech, let alone fail to slur words like “Rancho Viejo” or “arroyo Southwestern toad.”
When I was in law school, studying the Commerce Clause cases sapped any last vestige of respect I may have had for the law and Supreme Court.
Anyone who would entertain that sort of hypocritical, morally and intellectually bankrupt garbage, and pretend that the current “interpretation” is anything other than a pile of deep-fried dog shit ranks at or near the bottom of the evolutionary scale.
So, it comes as no surprise that Kennedy would defend it.
Love the snark in Robert’s dissent, BTW. Short and to the point.
SB: strength
is ignorance?
In Teddy’s defense, at the time he made those ridiculous comments it was already 12:00 somewhere and I was swimmin’ in it. (hic)
Hasn’t the Hero of Chappaquiddick bottomed out in the dishonesty department? I mean how much more dishonest can a fucking, disgusting, fat pig, sleaze-ball, booze-addled, leave a woman to die, drooling reprobate of a liar get?
nobody inportant,
I don’t remember giving you my business card.
Careful there. Da U-boat commander just loves a challenge.
How can I add, “expelled from Harvard for paying somebody to cheat and take an exam for me” without reducing my font size below recognition?
Kennedy is, no surprise of course, a moron as Social Security is not actually based on Congress’ interstate commerce power but on the tax and spend power.
Sheesh.
Jaysus, Uncle Teddy giggling the Jabba-fat for the camera and dragging in SocSec, et al, about a toad?
Hell, I guess his crack (as in “on”) troops have found the video showing Roberts whooping it up with Glenn Reynolds while sharing a blender full of puppies.
I’m fully convinced that MA voters keep sending him back to the Senate to keep him out of MA. Their vote is the equivalent of a pity fuck.
Hey, Ted, you forgot to mention women, minorities, and the gay community.
I’M OUTRAGED!!!
Every time that scotch soaked sack o’suet makes the news, the closing line to each story should be:
Mary Jo Kopeckne was unavailable for comment.
Ted’s just sensitive about Roberts referencing Lopez, which starts with the letter L and is next in the alphabet to the letterK, which reminds him of Mary Jo Kopechne. Roberts probably did this intentionally too, knowing this moment would come. Of course, this theory requires Ted to have actual feelings of remorse about Mary Jo’s death.