Comments on: Cato’s phenomenal year at the Supreme Court

By: Walter Olson

Walter Olson — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 17:33:28 +0000

Shorter verbatim Steve: “the right decision based on American law … is nothing to be proud of, much less for an honest person to have worked for.” I think we may need to go on differing on that.

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 16:52:45 +0000

Walter: I do not doubt for a moment that the SCOTUS made the right decision based on American law–that’s their job. However, when the law so clearly diverges from the universal common good, I believe there is a higher duty at play. At the end of the day, Walter, the CATO work there was for big corporations who provably engaged in unconscionable practices and then basically used a combination of corruption and national judicial boundaries as a means to avoid accountability. This is nothing to be proud of, much less for an honest person to have worked for.

By: Walter Olson

Walter Olson — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:36:26 +0000

This post does seem to bring 'em out, doesn't it? I'm still trying to figure out where I'm supposed to have announced "for US intervention in military escapades based on supposed human rights concerns elsewhere." (I don't think he got that impression by checking Cato's foreign policy work, which has been relentlessly and consistently critical of such interventions.) As for the Kiobel case, I will note that all nine Supreme Court justices agreed the case did not belong in American courts, even while disagreeing on the reasons why. Still, it's always good to be reminded that not all readers are well-disposed and well-informed.

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:11:05 +0000

Explain to me again how walter is cheering the demise of ATS but was for US intervention in military escapades based on supposed human rights concerns elsewhere? Oh ya – one benefitted the oil companies one way, the other the other. Situational ethics at its finest. Go on, walter.. cheer, cheer in triumphalist glory about that and other suits and flippantly compare this to sports victories.

Let’s just remember what Kiobel was all about, shall we: The Nigerian plaintiffs, who now live in the United States, claimed that an oil company in Nigeria provided food, transportation, and compensation to government forces as they beat, raped, robbed, and killed protestors concerned about the environmental damage caused by the company’s operations.

But, you know, making sure those people don’t get justice based on a legalistic technicality is better than the super bowl times the world series times sex with twenty supermodels.

By: Ben

Ben — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 04:03:51 +0000

“it’s more like the Globetrotters: it’s easy to prevail when the referees are part of an institutional conspiracy to win every time.”

Damned justice, it has a libertarian bias…

By: Eponymous Nicholas

Eponymous Nicholas — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 21:20:10 +0000

I don’t think it’s controversial to say that the conservative majority on the court is particularly conservative compared to, say, the previous couple generations of the conservatives on the court.

By: Levi

Levi — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 19:59:52 +0000

How does a conservative bench help the Cato Institute any? Libertarians are not conservatives.

By: Walter Olson

Walter Olson — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 19:23:15 +0000

Well, I was actually thinking of Nicholas as the park bench mutterer, so it’s welcome to know that his fix/conspiracy theory isn’t yours.

By: Allan

Allan — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 19:10:50 +0000

Now, come on Mr. Olson. Do you really believe that Cato would have done as well with the Warren court or if O’Connor and Souter had not retired?

I am not saying it was fixed. I am saying that SCOTUS’s current line-up is currently pre-disposed to take a conservative viewpoint (although the DOMA/Prop 8 decisions would likely still have resulted in Cato “victories”).

By: Walter Olson

Walter Olson — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 18:25:19 +0000

“Ahhh, you know all these cases are fixed… It’s just a racket anyway.” Are you the one I pass who’s always muttering to himself on the park bench across from the court?