On the Appointment of New Justices

Re filling Scalia's seat, I can easily see a scenario whereby no one gets nominated or confirmed this presidential term. Assuming the Democrats win the presidency in November but only barely gain a majority in the Senate one could see a 4-4 split for the foreseeable future. (In a 4-4 split the decision of the Circuit Appeals court being appealed holds sway *for that circuit only* so you could have different decisions in different circuits becoming the law.) Even with a Democratic president and majority in the Senate the Republicans could filibuster any nomination. (Or vice-versa if the Republicans should win the White House.)

If one of the liberal justices were to resign or die, that would create a 4-3 split, but still leaving the possibility of filibusters preventing any new nominations being approved for several years or until the Senate has a filibuster-proof majority. Nothing says we have to have 9 justices. It was originally six but has varied from seven (1807) to nine (1837) to ten (1867) then again to seven (1866) and back to nine (1869). Congress decides on the size. How this plays out will be fascinating to watch.

Note that while a recess appointment has been done before, most notably by Eisenhower (William Brennan) and the president has the authority under Article II, National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning redefined slightly what was meant by "recess" (you know when the children - Congress -- go out to play). Whether anyone would want to be nominated that way is problematic since the appointment is only temporary and would have to be confirmed after the session.

Of course it must be remembered that a vast majority of SCOTUS decisions are unanimous, (it hit a record high during the 2014 term) over 65% and that the decisions that split on ideological lines are very small. Only 14% were 5-4 and of those only 10 were ideological splits.

http://wtvr.com/2014/07/01/supreme-court-had-highest-percentage-of-unanimous-decisions-this-session/

http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/7-things-you-might-not-know-about-the-u-s-supreme-court

Why I'm Reluctant to Vote for Hillary.

I’m a long-time Democrat. My philosophy of government is that it has two major roles: provide for the common defense (emphasis on defense) and to build infrastructure. Aside from the usual definition of infrastructure that would include bridges, roads, airports, transportation, etc., I go a bit further and include health care. Health care plays an important role because it provides a stable environment for the work force and allows industry and business to compete more freely and without having to deal with forces they cannot control nor are good at understanding as the workers and management are often at odds over what it constitutes whereas both can understand what makes a quality product dickering only on what should be a fair recompense for delivering that product. Those three aspects are often at war with my libertarian side which dictates that government should have as little to do with what I do at home as possible, i.e. the social aspects, religion, sex, personal behavior that has no impact on anyone else, that both parties want to control, albeit from different sides. That side also dictates support for a free market, capitalist society, which government has an obligation to keep as level as possible.

Hillary is a believer in the status quo. She, like most politicians, doesn’t like to rock the boat, and she’s very good at telling assorted groups what they want to hear (no doubt a major reason why she continues to refuse to release transcripts of her speeches to the Goldman Sachs tycoons.) She’s also enamored of money, if not for the luxuries it can provide, but mostly because of the power it affords. So if she were to be elected, we can reasonably expect that government will remain pretty much the same as it did under both Bushes, Clinton, and Obama (the differences are mostly cosmetic - war as an instrument of national policy and a health care system designed by and for insurance companies not to mention continued attempts to control the social fabric.) A static environment where the powerful (defined today as those with lots of money) decide what becomes law and make sure that law benefits a very small segment of the population; continued United States presence all around the world with its concomitant budget busting expenditures in money and lives at the expense of infrastructure; and where those in power move the seats of that power to the Cayman Islands and other places overseas.

I’m not sure we, as a country can continue to afford that trajectory. It seems to me that the electorate senses that this year, but is not quite sure how to alter that path, hence the rise of the anti-establishment candidate (even though some of them are fraudulently so.)

All candidates preach change and that’s the problem. No one believes the standard lines anymore. This election is much more about the failure of the status quo and achieving real change and what direction that change will take, and trying to decide who offers the most authentic conviction for change.

Hillary lacks that conviction.

Review: Sins of the Fathers by Lawrence Block (the first Scudder novel)

(Audiobook.) There a few authors who can always be relied on to write interesting and entertaining stories. Lawrence Block is one of those. I’ve read many across all of his different series and they never fail to be enjoyable. Some are humorous like the “Burglar” series, others more serious character studies, like Scudder.

Sins of the Fathers is the first Matthew Scudder. Scudder is approached by a man whose daughter has been killed. Her ostensible boyfriend, the killer, has been caught and committed suicide, but the father (nice pun in the title as Scudder has lost his faith with the police department) wants to know why. As Scudder notes, the door has been opened and now he wants to look inside the room. It seems the daughter had left home a few years earlier and had been living as a prostitute.

Scudder, as his fans, will know, is not your usual P.I. A former cop, he now just looks into things for people. He doesn’t file reports, have expense accounts, or any of the usual trapping of the P.I. But he’s very good at asking questions. But that also provides him more latitude and incentive to dig a little harder than a cop might. Of course, nothing is at it first appears and things get complicated. Heart-pounding action it does not have, just good writing and interesting characters.

The book was first published in 1976 and the stereotypic descriptions some of the gay characters is typical of that period. The diatribe of the cab driver against the Zionists controlling and hiking gas prices looks even more ridiculous now than it was then given today’s plummeting costs. Certainly not a criticism, just an observation.

Block is at his best and Alan Sklar does the book credit. The way he reads the dialogue between Scudder and the killer’s father, a sanctimonious minister is priceless. A fine novel.

Review: Briarpatch by Ross Thomas

Audiobook: A BriarPatch can be many things: a hiding place, a place to avoid (as in Star Trek), a thicket of prickly bushes, and a place where you can get all tangled up. Ben Gill experiences all of those things in this book.

Felicity Dill, homicide detective, collects rent due on her duplex, gets in her car, and is blown to bits. Her brother, Ben, is an investigator for a Senate subcommittee. He immediately flies down to his hometown where she worked and discovers a mystery. Felicity had paid $37,000 cash for a very expensive duplex several months earlier and just a few weeks before her death had taken out a $250,000 term life policy with her brother as the beneficiary. Where did she get the money, and why would a twenty-eight-year-old woman take out a life insurance policy that large. Ben soon discovers a quagmire of murder and corruption.

He’s also been sent to get a deposition from an old friend Jake Spivey, ex-CIA who is being pursued by Clyde Brattle. All three had been involved during the Ford administration with trying to locate a threesome, known as the Jaspers who had apparently made off with millions that had been dispensed by Nixon to the “plumbers.” Brattle and Spivey were also the targets of the subcommittee's investigation that involved weapons sales after Vietnam.

Ross is a very good writer with images like, “it had no color unless winter rain has color.” And while I have nothing against protagonists who hop into bed with every woman (or girl) they meet (you know, like Reacher) Ben has plenty of offers but the good sense to hold off since virtually everyone has some kind of alternate agenda. Everything is linked together as one might expect. The ending is a bit unsatisfying and perhaps a sequel was intended.

As usual, well read by Frank Muller, who regretfully is no longer with us.

Review: A Case of Redemption by Adam Mitzner

After the 21,699,749th minute of his life, Dan Sorenson’s life fell apart when his wife and child were killed by a drunk driver. Having been a thousand dollar an hour lawyer. he’s now basically a drunk, when Nina, a friend of his wife’s best friend insists that he meet with Legally Dead, a black rapper being held at Riker’s. L.D. as he is known has been charged with the murder of his reputed girlfriend, Roxanne. Nina and Ben join forces to defend L.D. who insists he is innocent and there is reason to believe he may be right, even though the evidence appears overwhelming.

My measure of how much I enjoy a legal drama is legal repartee in the courtroom, the dialogue and interaction between lawyers and judges. By any measure this book succeeds well in that category.

A very surprising ending. Excellent page-turner.