Obsidian Wings

Another Surprise

by hilzoy

I have not written anything about the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, mostly because I didn't have anything interesting to say about it. When the nomination was first announced, I was pleasantly surprised. As I read further, I was a bit dismayed by some of the things he said, and especially what seemed to me to be a somewhat dismissive attitude towards the interests of women and minorities. But, fundamentally, I thought that while under any other President I can think of, I would have to think hard about his nomination and might well oppose it, under this President I had to hope he was confirmed, since virtually anyone else Bush is likely to nominate would be worse. The fact that seems genuinely to care about the law weighs a lot with me, and I felt no confidence whatsoever that if he were defeated, Bush would nominate someone else who shared that concern.

Or, in short: he was better than I had feared, and about as good as I could have hoped for, but that isn't saying all that much.

But this is better than I had expected:

"Judge John G. Roberts Jr. testified today, as he was pressed for his views on legalized abortion, that there is nothing in his Catholic faith that would prevent him from adhering to settled law on the bitterly divisive issue. (...)

Mr. Specter, who supports the right to abortion, had been expected to question the nominee aggressively on the issue, and he did. And while Judge Roberts did not wholeheartedly embrace the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision or the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision, he did signal that he would at least have to think long and hard before moving to upset them. He cited the principle of "stare decisis," a Latin term meaning to stand by the thing decided, in stating that the Roe ruling was "settled as a precedent of the court."

"So as of '92, you have a reaffirmation of the central holding in Roe," Judge Roberts recalled as Mr. Specter began the questioning. "That decision, that application of the principles of stare decisis is, of course, itself a precedent that would be entitled to respect under those principles."

The nominee gave cautious answers, citing the difficulty of giving specific answers to hypothetical questions. But as a general principle, he said, he believes in "the importance of settled expectations," that ordinary citizens as well as lawyers should be able to rely on the predictability and stability of settled law.

But not always. Although overturning precedent can be "a jolt to the legal system," he said, it is sometimes right and necessary. He cited the landmark Brown v. Board of Education ruling of 1954, which outlawed public school segregation and in so doing overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson decision of the 19th Century that had upheld "separate but equal" facilities. (...)

Mr. Specter questioned the nominee about a memorandum he wrote in 1981, while a lawyer in the Reagan administration, in which he referred to the "so-called right to privacy."

The senator wanted to know if the wording indicated that Judge Roberts was lukewarm to the concept of a right to privacy, or if in fact he believed that privacy was a right embodied in the Constitution.

"Senator, I do," the judge replied. He said that right was spelled out in the First and Fourth Amendments, protecting free speech and freedom from unreasonable searches, as well as the lesser-known Third Amendment, protecting homeowners against having soldiers quartered in their homes against their will. (...)

As for whether a president could "authorize" unlawful torture, Judge Roberts said, "I believe that no one is above the law." "

*** Update:
WaPo"

"Roberts was asked about his statement in a 2003 Senate hearing, when he was seeking confirmation as a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and said he regarded Roe v. Wade as "the settled law of the land."

"Well beyond that, it is settled as a precedent of the court entitled to respect under the principle of stare decisis ," Roberts said. (...)

Roberts said he agrees that "the right to privacy is protected under the Constitution in various ways." He said it was "fair" to say he does not hold the view today that was reflected in a 1981 memo, when he was a young lawyer in the Reagan administration and skeptically referred to a "so-called" right to privacy."

Footnote below the fold, for Sebastian (and anyone else)

Surprise!

by hilzoy

AP:

"Federal Emergency Management Agency director Mike Brown said Monday he has resigned "in the best interest of the agency and best interest of the president," three days after losing his onsite command of the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

"The focus has got to be on FEMA, what the people are trying to do down there," Brown told The Associated Press.

His decision was not a surprise. Brown was abruptly recalled to Washington on Friday, a clear vote of no confidence from his superiors at the White House and the Department of Homeland Security. Brown had been roundly criticized for FEMA's bearish response to the hurricane, which has caused political problem for Bush and fellow Republicans.

"I'm turning in my resignation today," Brown said. "I think it's in the best interest of the agency and the best interest of the president to do that and get the media focused on the good things that are going on, instead of me.""

September 11, 2005

It is, once again, a stunningly beautiful day here in New York City, this September 11th. Folks are making their way through the streets, Sunday paper and a coffee in hand, walking their dogs, pushing strollers, riding bikes, holding hands, and turning their faces upward to soak up the rays of the glorious September sun.

September is arguably New York's best month. The air is more breathable, the sky more clear, the heat less oppressive, and every industry is back in motion after their summer vacations...there's new art, theater, sports, music...life.

The New York Times printed this today:

Spalding Gray, the actor and monologuist, died in 2004. The following letter, which he wrote in the aftermath of 9/11, will appear in "Life Interrupted," a published version of the monologue he was working on at the time of his death.

For 34 years I lived with you and came to love you. I came to you because I loved theater and found theater everywhere I looked. I fled New England and came to Manhattan, that island off the coast of America, where human nature was king and everyone exuded character and had big attitude. You gave me a sense of humor because you are so absurd.

When we were kids, my mom hung a poster over our bed. It had a picture of a bumblebee, and under the picture the caption read:

"According to all aerodynamic laws, the bumblebee cannot fly because its body weight is not in the right proportion to its wingspan. But ignoring these laws, the bee flies anyway."

That is still New York City for me.

God Bless New York City. God Bless the United States. God comfort the families of those we lost four years ago. Our thoughts are with them today.

And now, I've gotta fly...

Consider this an open thread.

Clearing Some Backlog

This is the quintessential iceberg post, since virtually all of it is submerged below the fold.  It's long, rambling, self-analyzing and probably not considered a "feel-good" piece.  You've been warned.

(Update at the end)

Fafnir to the Rescue

OK, so it's cold comfort that Michael Brown had to leave the Gulf Coast because "other challenges and threats remain around the world" but never fear, Fafnir's here. With his "Do-It-Yourself Emergency Management Guide," the savvy Sri Lankan saves the day:

Today we're gonna show you how to get through a major disaster just usin stuff you've got lyin around the home.

You will need:

construction paper

glue or glue sticks

a can of baking soda

some play-doh (optional)

200 gallons of distilled water and 100 pounds of canned food

The topics covered in the DIYEMG include Make-And-Bake Clay Levee!, Do-It-Yourself National Guard!, and (my personal favorite), How to Make a Paper Helicopter (you've got to see the picture).

Did Bush Know?

Behind-the-curtain statement by a Redstate editor:  "Bush knew Gilligan was sick and he didn't lift a finger."  What say an open thread?

Moral Values

by hilzoy

From UPI:

"Police from surrounding jurisdictions shut down several access points to one of the only ways out of New Orleans last week, effectively trapping victims of Hurricane Katrina in the flooded and devastated city.

An eyewitness account from two San Francisco paramedics posted on an internet site for Emergency Medical Services specialists says, "Thousands of New Orleaners were prevented and prohibited from self-evacuating the city on foot."

"We shut down the bridge," Arthur Lawson, chief of the City of Gretna Police Department, confirmed to United Press International, adding that his jurisdiction had been "a closed and secure location" since before the storm hit. "All our people had evacuated and we locked the city down," he said. The bridge in question -- the Crescent City Connection -- is the major artery heading west out of New Orleans across the Mississippi River.

Lawson said that once the storm itself had passed Monday, police from Gretna City, Jefferson Parrish and the Louisiana State Crescent City Connection Police Department closed to foot traffic the three access points to the bridge closest to the West Bank of the river. He added that the small town, which he called "a bedroom community" for the city of New Orleans, would have been overwhelmed by the influx. "There was no food, water or shelter" in Gretna City, Lawson said. "We did not have the wherewithal to deal with these people.

"If we had opened the bridge, our city would have looked like New Orleans does now: looted, burned and pillaged." "

***

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

-- Matthew 25

Good News and Better News Friday

The good news is that FEMA Director Michael Brown is being relieved of his role in overseeing the recovery efforts for Hurricane Katrina:

Amid harsh criticism of federal relief efforts, Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff announced Friday that Michael Brown, director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is handing over Hurricane Katrina relief duties to a Coast Guard official and returning to Washington to oversee the national office.

“Other challenges and threats remain around the world,” and Brown is needed to prepare for those, Chertoff said at a news conference in Baton Rouge.

I know it's not the partisan thing to say, but I hope this means the criticism can take a huge back seat to the recovery now...we'll see.

The better news is that initial sweeps of New Orleans revealed far fewer dead bodies than was previously estimated:

Authorities said Friday that their first systematic sweep of the city found far fewer bodies than expected, suggesting that Hurricane Katrina's death toll may not be the catastrophic 10,000 feared.

"I think there's some encouragement in what we've found in the initial sweeps that some of the catastrophic deaths that some people predicted may not have occurred," said Terry Ebbert, New Orleans' homeland security chief.

Ebbert declined to give a new estimate of the dead.

Authorities shifted their attention to counting and removing the dead in a grid-by-grid search after spending days persuading and cajoling the living into leaving the shattered city because of the danger of fires and disease from the filthy, corpse-laden floodwaters.

Clearly the folks long the Gulf Coast can use all the good news they can get right now. Let's hope much more is on its way soon.

The Amazing Self-Refuting Talking Point

by hilzoy

From the Washington Post:

"The Republican National Committee sent allies a list of "talking points," including: "It's disappointing that while President Bush has focused his administration's entire efforts towards saving lives and helping the victims of Katrina, there are those who are using this tragedy to score cheap political points.""

This is actually quite funny. It is true that now is not the time to worry about scoring political points. The Republican National Committee presumably thinks that this idea can be used against its opponents. But, obviously, it applies equally to them, and to whoever wrote this talking point: it is an effort to contain the political damage President Bush has sustained as a result of his administration's inept response to Hurricane Katrina. When the Republican National Committee hands out talking points, it is obviously engaged in an effort to score political points. By its own logic, therefore, it should be condemned.

Not so fast, you might say: it's only "cheap" political points that are condemned here. And this is true: making a valid point that is also political, or that has political ramifications, is presumably OK, so long as one is not motivated by the desire to score political points, as opposed to the desire to do something about the hurricane victims, or to prevent any similar catastrophe from occurring in the future.

However, this still leaves the RNC condemned by its own logic. As I wrote earlier, trying to figure out who is responsible for whatever went wrong is essential to the effort to make sure we do not repeat our mistakes the next time a disaster, natural or man-made, strikes us. This is absolutely not a cheap political point, so long as the attempt to fix blame is carried out honestly. By contrast, the attempt to discredit anyone who tries to figure out where blame lies as a person who is interested only in scoring 'cheap political points' is directly counterproductive: it is aimed at preventing any honest accounting, and thus at impeding our attempts to fix whatever went wrong with our response. This is politicizing a catastrophe, and doing so in a way that directly harms our ability to get it right next time.

Barring The Red Cross From New Orleans

by hilzoy

The Red Cross has been barred from entering New Orleans. The Red Cross' web site says this:

"The state Homeland Security Department had requested--and continues to request--that the American Red Cross not come back into New Orleans following the hurricane. Our presence would keep people from evacuating and encourage others to come into the city."

CNN, by contrast, reports:

"Louisiana officials rebuffed American Red Cross requests to enter New Orleans with relief supplies last week because of concerns over logistical difficulties, Red Cross and state officials said Thursday.

The Red Cross never launched its relief effort in the city.

The national president of the American Red Cross, Marsha Evans, first made the request to undertake the operation during a visit to the state on September 1, three days after Hurricane Katrina struck, a local Red Cross chapter official said.

Vic Howell, chief executive officer of the agency's Louisiana Capital Area Chapter, said he renewed that request the next day to Col. Jay Mayeaux, the deputy director of the Louisiana Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness.

"We had adequate supplies, the people and the vehicles," Howell said at a news conference in Baton Rouge. "It was the middle of a military rescue operation trying to save lives. We were asked not to go in, and we abided by that recommendation."

Mayeaux, appearing at the news conference with Howell, said he had asked the Red Cross to wait 24 hours for conditions to be "set" for the operation.

"To set up a feeding station to feed a large number of people, you need space. You need to escort the personnel into position. ... And we asked Mr. Howell, and he concurred, to wait 24 hours to go to set that in," Mayeaux said.

By Saturday, however, the point became moot because the large-scale evacuation of the city was under way, Howell and Mayeaux said.

"After that point in time ... their rescue operation was in full force, and they felt they had adequate supplies there to take care of it without (the Red Cross) being introduced into the situation," Howell said. "So we did not go directly into New Orleans.""

If the Red Cross requested access on September 1 (Thursday, when people were still dying at the Convention Center), they should absolutely have been allowed in. The reason CNN cites for the decision not to allowing them in is (to my mind) completely inadequate, but it at least makes a certain amount of sense. The reason cited on the Red Cross' web site, however, is morally appalling. People were at that time being prevented from leaving the city by National Guard troops. Many of them probably would have left had they been allowed to do so. The idea of not letting the Red Cross provide food, water, and medical assistance to people who were dying in order not to make New Orleans into some sort of magnet for the indigent is just grotesque. The people in the Louisiana State government who made that decision did the wrong thing in any case; if the Red Cross is right about their reasons, however, they made it for reasons that are morally obscene.