Monday, November 20, 2006

Fed Soc annual convention -- a somber meeting?

The New York Times portrays this years Federalist Society Convention as a grim affair, with conservative lawyers apparently coming to terms with the the fact that its now become much harder for them to be elevated to the bench.

The New York Times has been known in the past to let its editorial preferences color its reporting, so I don't know how accurate this depiction is, but it makes for an interesting read.

My favourite quote: "The days when the Federalist Society would get just about anything it wanted are over." -- Chuck Schumer. Further evidence of the fact that he not only has a tenuous grasp on constitutional issues, but apparently on reality as well. The Federalist Society would get just about anything it wanted?? Souter? Harriet Miers? Roberts desperately trying to disassociate himself from the Federalist Society?

3 comments:

Orrin Johnson said...

It's interesting that the assumption of the reporter is that the reason conservative legal thinkers are disapointed is because of a blow to their own personal ambitions. There is no sense in the article that they may be concerned about matters greater than themselves - that crucial principles of limited government, separation of powers, and judicial restraint (all of which most of us feel are critical to our freedom) are threatened by "living Constitution" judges.

We look at other people and assume they act as we would. This selfish attidue is quite telling as to this reporter's narrow vision, and is suggestive of the environment and culture in which he works.

And Juvenal has it right - as much as I like Chief Justice Roberts, to say he was "active in the Federalist Society" simply ignores all reality. Not that I expect anything else from the NYT.

PubliusRex said...

The Federalist Society has long been something of a straw man for the left. Schumer's comments reflect that.

Orrin Johnson said...

More on the veracity of the NYT piece from one of the attendees who was quoted in the piece:

"All in all, a fairly typical MSM treatment - not a fabrication, no made up words; nothing so dramatic. In fact, as I said, the part in quotes is accurate, and might have bothered me a bit less if it stood on its own. And yet, there had to be a bending and selective truncation of my words to fit a pre-selceted narrative. Which, by now, is not news."

The description of the reporter is especially funny.