Weird stuff around the internets:
(1) Fill in the blank on the lawyer filing a federal appeal of the California Supreme Court's Prop 8 decision:
“For a long time I’ve personally felt that we are doing a grave injustice for people throughout this country by denying equality to gay and lesbian individuals,” _____ said in an interview with The Advocate. “The individuals that we represent and will be representing in this case feel they’re being denied their rights. And they’re entitled to have a court vindicate those rights.”Your first guess was Ted Olson, right? Bullshit it was. And yet ... that's the answer.
When pressed about his service with the Bush administration, which in 2004 endorsed an amendment to the U.S. constitution that would prohibit same-sex marriage, Olson said he was personally against the amendment at the time, though he made no public statements on the matter.I look forward to Regnery Press's publishing his vindication of gay marriage.
As for the timing of the suit, Olson said that recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court “make it clear that individuals are entitled to be treated equally under the Constitution. I’m reasonably confident that this is the right time for these [injustices] to be vindicated.”
(2) Who says that Sonia Sotomayor's legal qualifications are dubious? John Yoo. "Undistinguished," he says. I can't wait to see what OPR says about him. But a torturer's opposition to "empathy" is understandable.
(3) The Mississippi Court of Appeals has six judges who cannot understand the difference between "may" and "shall." Only law junkies need click through; the rest of you should just write to the Barksdale Reading Institute, asking them to provide emergency literacy assistance to the court.
(4) Torture in the news: While the OLC memos were pending, to whom did CIA turn for legal authority to torture Zubaydah? Gonzo. Not their own general counsel, Rizzo; not the AG; but the White House Counsel. In a country dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, and thus equally bound by the rule of law, that would merit its own paragraph in an indictment. In America, probably not. We can't punish past crimes, because that would be looking backwards, and Obama is all about hope for the future.