Skip to main content

View Diary: More opinions on blocking Burris (315 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Profs. Amar and Chafetz Overstate Their Case (8+ / 0-)

    The article is shockingly confident when their theory has not been tested and the one applicable precedent goes against them.  The fact is that Burris's appointment appears to have been lawful and there is no legal standard governing the appointment of a senator (someone can be picked for any reason or no reason at all), so I fail to see how the Senate would win this if it ultimately went to the SCOTUS.

    The pleasure of hating...eats into the heart of religion...[and] makes patriotism an excuse for carrying fire, pestilence, and famine into other lands. - W. Haz

    by rfahey22 on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 06:45:27 PM PST

    •  I agree (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rfahey22, Escamillo

      Not only do they overstate the case, they rely on shear speculation that Burris's appointment was wrongful.

      With all respect to Mr. Chafetz, he graduated from law school one year ago.  I'd prefer to rely on experts with a bit more "expertise".

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site