Patterico's Pontifications

7/17/2006

Quiz: Who Appointed this Judge?

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General,Law — Patterico @ 6:52 pm



A Los Angeles Times headline reads:

A veteran judge will rule on the legality of the NSA’s warrantless anti-terror surveillance. Greenpeace is among the petitioners.

A veteran judge! That sounds like quite a compliment — as if the paper thinks this is really a great judge! So I’ll give you one guess as to which President appointed the judge. Hint: I guessed easily.

Answer below the fold.

[Extended entry]

Yes, you guessed right. The judge was appointed by President Carter. The paper must be expecting an anti-Bush ruling.

There is good reason to. The judge, Anna Diggs Taylor, once engaged in a highly unusual attempt to take the Michigan affirmative action case from a conservative judge:

Earlier, Chief Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of the federal District Court in Detroit tried to take the suit against the law school away from Judge Bernard Freedman, who had been assigned it through a blind draw–and who was suspected of being skeptical about affirmative action–and consolidate it with a similar suit against the university’s undergraduate admissions practice, which Judge Patrick Duggan was hearing. The chief judge dropped that effort was dropped after the judge hearing the law school complaint went public with a blistering opinion objecting to what he termed “the highly irregular” effort of the chief judge. Judge Duggan ruled in favor of the undergraduate racial preferences, while Judge Freedman ruled against the law school preferences.

That’s the kind of judge the L.A. Times describes as a “veteran judge.” Just in case you were wondering.

Expect the surveillance to be declared unlawful by the “veteran judge.”

31 Responses to “Quiz: Who Appointed this Judge?”

  1. Isn’t it quite a stretch to call her a Judge. And they wonder why no one respects judges, lawyers and the court system. I no longer respect them and as a fact find most of them below scum on a pond.

    Scrapiron (9f37aa)

  2. Patterico,

    In what manner did the ‘veteran judge” get assigned this particular case?

    ras (f9de13)

  3. ras–

    I’ll bet that the ACLU chose her district just because they knew she’d grab it for herself.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  4. whoo, you’re barking at your reflection there, veteran prosecutor. “veteran” just means possessed of substantial experience or having served for a (long) time, all of the carter appointees are veterans by now, but not as veteran as the surviving reagan appointees. i agree that judge taylor’s attempted case grab you cited looks fishy. i’m opposed to quotas too, but i take comfort from the knowledge that questions of law aren’t finally decided at the district court level. in california, the electronic frontier foundation’s suit against at&t over phone surveillance is being heard by vaughn walker, yet another veteran judge, maybe more to your liking.
    @kevin murphy:
    i’ll bet that the aclu chose her district because they realized that the university of michigan was in michigan, which makes the michigan court an altogether more appropriate venue than, say, hawaii. damn these liberal venue laws, in a truly free country you would be able to sue anybody anywhere.

    assistant devil's advocate (70f2b4)

  5. My sense was that he was making a comment about the LA Times and its biases, not about the judge. Interesting how you immediately draw the other conclusion. Bias anyone ?

    Mike K (416363)

  6. “veteran” just means possessed of substantial experience or having served for a (long) time, all of the carter appointees are veterans by now, but not as veteran as the surviving reagan appointees.

    I agree. On the one hand, it’s a bit counter-intuitive, as anyone appointed by Carter has been on the job for 4-12 years longer than anyone appointed by Reagan. OTOH, the Carter years in general, and his judicial appointments in particular, were so damned backward that serving during his administration should probably count as a few negative years of experience. For once, ADA makes a valid point.

    Xrlq (f52b4f)

  7. we’re all a little biased, mike, but the title of the post is “quiz: who appointed this judge?” and his answer was “carter”, based solely on the use of the word “veteran” in the paper, so it seemed to me that he was commenting on the paper, the judge and jimmy carter all at once. he’ll clear this up if he feels like it. i’m more interested in the tacit statement in your comment: are you the legendary, lone, truly impartial human being come to save us? if so, what evidence can you offer us in support of this claim?

    assistant devil's advocate (2ed1ea)

  8. @xrlq:
    damn, you caught me, the reagan appointees are not quite as veteran as the carter appointees. i don’t know what i was thinking. maybe when i write my memoirs, i’ll title them (borrowing a little from hillary) “living history in reverse”.

    assistant devil's advocate (2ed1ea)

  9. I guess “veteran” sounds better than “doddering”….

    mojo (6e0061)

  10. Ohmygawwwwd, Carter appointed the judge!

    A judge who (wait for it) once did something slightly odd.

    Shoot her! Shoot her now before she destroys America!

    jade (21ca70)

  11. The Times x2 are businesses in decline, as you frequently note, and periodically we get tangible acknowledgement from the papers of their protracted troubles. So here’s todays news, courtesy of Michelle Malkin.

    This is significant news, because when the Times opened this plant in Edison they were looking optimistically to growing as a “national” newspaper, with many regional editions. This plant was to be the nervecenter of the planned web of plants, all to be owned facilities. Big news! Growth! Success!

    Instead what’s happening? Retrenchment. Job losses. National shame. Financial decline.

    The Tribune Company should take note.

    The shareholders expect action. Replace Keller and Bacquet. Replace the useless scion Sulzberger, who hasn’t earned his job and is destroying the Times.

    MTF (335f9f)

  12. Patterico, I understand you’re currently working overtime on the history-changing Frisch Affair, and that you probably want to touch on other subjects – just to show that you’re not completely obssessed.

    But parsing the use of common, cliched adjectivals, i.e. “veteran”, for “bias” … is, well, probably not the answer.

    Demogenes Aristophanes (c38278)

  13. Troll.
    Irrelevancy.
    Demogenes.
    Some irony required.

    Dan Collins (69d423)

  14. The “irrelevancy” I introduced would be what again?

    That Patterico bases his contention that the LA Times is “expecting an anti-Bush ruling” from a particular judge on a Times’ editor’s use of the utterly banal and appropriate modifier “veteran” to describe the long-serving jurist?

    That irrelevancy? The one that makes up the entirety of this frankly stupid Patterico post?

    Demogenes Aristophanes (c38278)

  15. And it never occurred to you, DA, that there were many other adjectives that could have been used? Like “controversial” or “liberal,” or that the phrase “Carter appointee” could have been used? Because you just know that the Dog Trainer would not have pointed out that a judge more likely to rule for the program is a “conservative” or a “Reagan (or Bush) appointee” or maybe had a couple of unpaid parking tickets.

    Something here is “frankly stupid” alright.

    SmokeVanThorn (210276)

  16. Adjectives. Is “douchebaggy” an adjective?

    Dan Collins (69d423)

  17. SmokeVanThorn –

    Patterico is clearly a long-time reader and critic of the LA Times. I’m not. Okay, fine.

    Let’s say I concede that there’s all kinds of bias in the Times against conservatives, just for the sake of argument.

    Let’s say the bias is all over the place. Let’s say the paper is printed with the blood of fetuses on pink-and-green striped paper, it’s so goddamned leftardesque.

    And the best Patterico can come up with is the use of the phrase “veteran judge” in a sub-head? When everybody knows that headlines and sub-heads often give preference to “words-that-fit-the-space” over “words-that-fit-the-meaning”, anyway?

    I mean, c’mon, dude. Surely the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy at the Times leaves bigger footprints than that.

    Demogenes Aristophanes (c38278)

  18. And the best Patterico can come up with is the use of the phrase “veteran judge” in a sub-head? When everybody knows that headlines and sub-heads often give preference to “words-that-fit-the-space” over “words-that-fit-the-meaning”, anyway?

    I mean, c’mon, dude. Surely the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy at the Times leaves bigger footprints than that.

    Yeah, SmokeVanThorn. If the LAT were really biased and leftist, some blogger would be on them all the time. He’d document their biases regularly, and round them up at the end of each year. The very fact that no such person exists proves that our Greek friend here is right.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  19. Great. I look forward to combing your archives for all the examples of LA Times bias.

    I just hope the majority meet a higher standard of proof than the insidious use of an innocuous adjective, cited here.

    Demogenes Aristophanes (c38278)

  20. Great. I look forward to combing your archives for all the examples of LA Times bias.

    Heh.

    See you in a few weeks.

    Patterico (50c3cd)

  21. Defending Jimmy Carter or anyone he appointed to any position proves one of two things about the defender.Either he or she was too young to buy gasoline on January 20, 1981 or that he or she has lost contact with reality.

    Ken Hahn (57570e)

  22. Either he or she was too young to buy gasoline on January 20, 1981 or that he or she has lost contact with reality.

    Wow. That’s a bold gauntlet to throw down. Especially considering this.

    Just 50 cents more in inflation-adjusted dollars to go before Ken Hahn feasts royally on crow!

    Demogenes Aristophanes (c38278)

  23. […] Who is Ana Diggs Taylor? She is a former Carter administration presidential campaigner who was rewarded for that effort by Carter in 1979 with a lifetime appointment to U.S. District Court in Detroit. […]

    Webloggin - Blog Archive » Another Win for the Terrorists Courtesy of Carter Activist Judge Appointee (a2d188)

  24. Ms. Taylor sounds to me like a judge who actually gives a damn about preserving the freedom of individuals from the tyranny of government. As for Jimmy Carter, he may have had his troubles with gasoline, but at least he wasn’t purposely using them to shovel loot into the pockets of his buddies in the gas industry.

    Raving Moderate (7c53f0)

  25. […] As I predicted last month, the NSA’s controversial surveillance program has been ruled unconstitutional by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, an ideologue Carter-appointed judge who has a documented history of bending the rules to obtain the leftist result. […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Ideologue Leftist Judge Rules NSA Program Unconstitutional (421107)

  26. […] Patterico notes that Judge Taylor stayed true to form in this case, …but a limited sampling of reaction from intelligent lawyers across the blogosphere suggests that she did indeed twist the law, as I predicted she would. […]

    Pundit Review » Blog Archive » Jimmy Carter: still bad for America after all these years (453dbc)

  27. As for Jimmy Carter, he may have had his troubles with gasoline, but at least he wasn’t purposely using them to shovel loot into the pockets of his buddies in the gas industry.

    You can of course explain exactly how Bush is “purposely using them to shovel loot into the pockets of his buddies in the gas industry”.

    Gerald A (fe1f90)

  28. Gasoline, schmasoline.

    Carter was such an inept president that he lost big for reelection…so big, in fact, he gave his concession speech while the polls were still open on the west coast.

    We’re still paying for that ineptness today.

    Paul (51fad1)

  29. […] The good news is we are a nation of laws. A decision will eventually be handed down by the SCOTUS and both sides will have to acknowledge and abide by the ruling. Even those of us who find the ACLU’s motives suspect have to appreciate the value of having a final decision rendered for this important legal question. Others blogging this: Patterico predicted the ruling: As I predicted last month, the NSA’s controversial surveillance program has been ruled unconstitutional by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, an ideologue Carter-appointed judge who has a documented history of bending the rules to obtain the leftist result. […]

    The Real Ugly American.com » Blog Archive » NSA Wiretapping Program Unconstitutional? (4e8dcb)

  30. seems to me that any Judge who does anything that the right is not ok with is an “activist judge” or a “liberal”. The simple fact is that Gonzales failed to show is “authority” which he’s claimed to have had on numerous occassions. The only way an appeal will hold is if Gonzales can find a document that specifically allows the president to do unwarranted wiretaps (which happens to be in specific conflict with the forth amendment)… he doesn’t have that document/authority. My prediction is that it’s going to be a 6-3 vote on the SCOTUS with Roberts, Alito, and Thomas going with the administration. they lose. The really interesting thing about this is that if the dems pull off a house victory this fall and the appeal fails articles of impeachment could be a reality.

    On a final note… you continually refer to this judge as a Carter-Appointed Judge as if that somehow all judges appointed by democrats are somehow not qualified… should I remind you about Harriet Meyers?

    Bruce (18adef)

  31. Bruce said:

    On a final note… you continually refer to this judge as a Carter-Appointed Judge as if that somehow all judges appointed by democrats are somehow not qualified… should I remind you about Harriet Meyers?

    Why it possesses the logically challenged such as Bruce to try to argue about advanced topics such as constitutional law is beyond me.

    Please note that the statement “All democrat appointees are unqualified as judges” is not the same as the statement “All unqualified judges are democrat appointees.” Please leave this discussion to those who have mastered modus ponens.

    BobM (2a1c60)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2228 secs.