We cannot, of course, repair the damage that may already have been done to one or more of the parties as a result of this premature disclosure. I say "willful" because the information in the published reports was too detailed to have been the product of inadvertent disclosures. Moreover, because one or more of their number has been guilty of a willful breach of trust, this incident must cast a shadow over the dozen or more able young law clerks who had become privy to the preliminary drafts.
Each member of this panel has been aggrieved by it, as have the parties who brought this case to us for adjudication. The seriousness of this violation cannot be overstated. The issuance today of those opinions in their final form will demonstrate the general accuracy of the information divulged to The Legal Times. I refer to an article that appeared on September 30, 1991, in The Legal Times, which purported to report in some detail on the contents of preliminary drafts of the majority and dissenting opinions. Unfortunately, this case has also proven the occasion for a most serious breach of trust. This litigation deals with a sensitive subject, and it is not surprising that it should have aroused some passions. 30, 1991, at 20.) Judge Buckley wrote a concurring opinion that addressed this leak: ( Senate Mulls Thomas' Controversial Case Draft Opinion Would Overturn FCC Ruling On Gender Preferences, LEGAL TIMES, Sept. Several months earlier, on September 30, 1991, The Legal Times published a report that contained details of draft opinions in the case. Valeo.) The opinion held that the FCC violated the Equal Protection Clause by granting an applicant extra credit for being a woman. (Yes, that would be Justice Thomas and the James Buckley from Buckley v. The panel included Chief Judge Mikva, and Circuit Judges Thomas and Buckley. On February 19, 1992, a panel of the D.C.
#BUCKLEY SUPREME COURTSHIP FULL#
» To read our full conversation and add your thoughts, visit /bookclub (opens in new tab).
#BUCKLEY SUPREME COURTSHIP SERIES#
To RSVP, e-mail us at MONTH: Air, an ongoing comic-book series by G. LAUREN: I think he wanted to show that neither party has a monopoly on idiocy.ĬOME TO OUR LIVE BOOK CLUB EVENT! Live in the area, or planning a visit? Join us with special guest author Lucinda Rosenfeld on August 13 at McNally Jackson Books in New York City. Besides, with farcical characters like these, you risk alienating half your readers if you attach a clear-cut ideology to them. His last name is synonymous with the GOP, yet he backed Obama. LIZZIE: I'm sure that's what Buckley intended. But on Buckley's court, I couldn't figure out who was right and who was left. LEA: Why not? On the current court, Justices Scalia and Ginsburg are on opposite sides, and their families vacation together. LAUREN: She did stupid things! You're going to decide a case by flipping a coin? You're going to bed the chief justice? When she was asked some constitutional law question, she said that people watching at home were saying, "Wake me up if they find pubic hair on any Coke cans." Then, once she joined the court, she went limp. ELIZABETH: But I loved her during the confirmation hearings, dismantling every salvo they could throw at her.
0 kommentar(er)
