Said lawprof Laurence Tribe, quoted in "Can He Do That? Here’s What Biden’s Move on the Equal Rights Amendment Means. Presidents have no direct role in approving constitutional amendments. So what could President Biden’s pronouncement recognizing a new one actually do?" (NYT).
From the article: "Proponents of the Equal Rights Amendment have long made it clear that their strategy is primarily a political, not a legal one. Their goal is to dare Republicans to challenge the legitimacy of sex equality, and of moving to nullify something as simple as equal rights for women."
I don't think Biden even purported to "do" anything. He merely stated his legal opinion. Given the well-known deterioration of his mental capacity, who cares what he thinks?
Anyway, as you endeavor to maintain your own mental sharpness, take note of what's happening in the twilight between law and politics.
AND: Tribe's line "you throw at the wall whatever you can" seems to relate to the old expression "throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks." How did that get started? Grok tells me about a 1946 cookbook callled "You Can Cook If You Can Read." It says you can test whether spaghetti is done by throwing it against the wall. I don't know if that's the origin of the expression. I always think of Walter Matthau throwing the spaghetti linguini against the wall in "The Odd Couple":
PLUS: I don't know if this is less or more amusing, but a colleague just sent me a link to "The ERA Is Now Law!" by Professor Tribe in — of all places — The Falls Church News-Press. It's also at that new website The Contrarian, with a different title: "The Equal Rights Amendment at Long Last/Thanks to President Biden, the Constitution will finally guarantee equality for all."
My colleague thinks Tribe is contradicting himself: first, Tribe said it was law, and then Tribe said it was politics. My response is that saying it's law is doing politics. You decide: Is it spaghetti, linguini, or garbage?
Posts
59 comments:
Given the well-known deterioration of his mental capacity, who cares what he thinks?
Given the now finally generally acknowledged and accepted deterioration of his mental capacity it matters that he is still on the job and still making pronouncements. He's also still the highest ranking Democrat and it matters a great deal what he says and, perhaps more importantly, who continues to recognize what he says. That says a great deal about them...
...you throw at the wall whatever you can
We all know what you're still full of...
I don't think Biden even purported to "do" anything.
I don't think he even knows this was done, TBH.
"Proponents of the Equal Rights Amendment have long made it clear that their strategy is primarily a political, not a legal one. Their goal is to dare Republicans to challenge the legitimacy of sex equality, and of moving to nullify something as simple as equal rights for women."
Back in the days of Betty Ford's Republican Party the amendment was more or less a bipartisan measure (Congress actually passed it under Nixon). But "proponents of the ERA"? Have there been any of those anywhere for the last 40 years or so? Didn't everyone accept that the amendment was dead -- and indeed, unnecessary? If Tribe is really privy to the strategies of this not really existent group -- if it's really not about laws but about politics -- doesn't that mean that the amendment is in fact unnecessary?
This. It's not even a bunch of staffers telling the monkey to dance. The monkey isn't told anything, and the monkey likes it that way.
"sex equality"
About 500,000 Ukrainians have been killed or maimed in the war, almost all of them men. Get back to me when there is "sex equality" on the battlefield.
Their goal is to dare Republicans to challenge the legitimacy of sex equality
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where they get what they want. I guess like refusing to put your pronouns on your home page?
Some (trans)women are more equal than others. How does that fit with an ERA formulated 50-60 years ago?
Speaker Johnson asked Biden why he had halted LNG exports. Biden flat out denied he had done so ("I didn't do that"). Johnson says he didn't think Biden was lying to him. He believed Biden honestly didn't know/remember what he had done just 3 weeks prior.
Thank God this is (almost) over.
"Their goal is to dare Republicans to challenge the legitimacy of sex equality..."
This merits a lazy hand flap and 'wut-evah', as far as I'm concerned. When have Republicans made such a challenge to said legitimacy? It was a bi-partisan effort, and yet the bi-partisan body never bothered to muster the necessary support to ratify it. The Democrats never stop blaming Republicans for doing things they didn't do.
Multiple blog posts here. Biden's strategy is working.
Biden's strategy is working.
We're all in on the gag now, Readering. You don't have to pretend any more.
The goal was some posts in an internet backwater? One for Biden's accomplishments list, then...
Given the well-known deterioration of his mental capacity, who cares what he thinks?
Biden? Or Tribe? It works for either one.
Now that they’re losing, we can relax and appreciate the irony of the party of protecting our institutions destroying anything and everything if they think it will give them an advantage.
The ERA is gender neutral. Seems like the GOP should welcome as a basis on which to strike down any and all programs or standards that favor women over men. Fire department and military fitness standards have been in the news lately. Unconstitutional under the ERA. There are untold scholarships and affirmative action programs to promote women in universities, industries, corporate leadership positions etc. All unconstitutional. It’s the equal right amendment, not the equitable outcome amendment.
...you throw at the wall whatever you can
Among 1960s leftists, it was "motherfuckers." But remember, those were the good old days.
Up Against the Wall Motherfucker
...Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers, came from a poem by Amiri Baraka. Abbie Hoffman characterized them as "the middle-class nightmare... an anti-media phenomenon simply because their name could not be printed".
1967 – Forced their way into The Pentagon during an anti-war protest.
1967 – Flung blood, eggs and stones at U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk who was attending a Foreign Policy Association event in New York.
January, 1968 – "Assassinated" poet Kenneth Koch (using blanks).
February, 1968 - Dumped uncollected refuse from the Lower East Side into the fountain at Lincoln Center on the opening night of a gala "bourgeois cultural event" during a NYC garbage strike (an event documented in the Newsreel film Garbage).
1968 – Organized and produced free concert nights in the Fillmore East after successfully demanding that owner Bill Graham give the community the venue for a series of weekly free concerts. These "Free Nights" were short-lived as the combined forces of NY City Hall, the police, and Graham terminated the arrangement.
December 12, 1968 - Created a ruckus at the Boston Tea Party: after the MC5 opened for the Velvet Underground one of the Motherfuckers got on stage and started haranguing the audience, directing them to "...burn this place down and take to the streets...". This got "The Five" banned from the venue.
December 18, 1968 - Rioted at an MC5 show at the Fillmore East. Some "beat (Graham) with a chain and broke his nose". This got the Detroit band banned from all venues controlled by Graham and his friends.
Cut the fences at Woodstock, allowing thousands to enter for free.
It needs an equal capability amendment.
"you throw at the wall whatever you can." As if we didn't know. Still, it's good for progs openly to dispense with appeals to principle, reason, law, or "democracy." You throw at the wall whatever you can. Accuse Trump of collusion, Kavanaugh of sexual assault, JD of being weird, whatever. Make up your own Constitution, whatever. But might a few progs have second thoughts, like, preferring the smart party not to be stupid?
I doubt that Biden did this, it was whoever controls press releases and his Twitter feed. He may not even know it happened (press conference?).
I think it would be interesting to investigate how this proclamation came about, because the President has no official duty to enact Amendments. I think we should know if he actually made the proclamation or someone else did. If the latter, then it would bring into question many of his final acts as President.
Then again, since nothing actually happened, then not really worthy of investigation. Nobody will admit they are acting on Biden’s behalf without his authorization. And really, the funny thing about the ERA is that goes against the Biden Administration’s attempt to change Title IX, which has already gone down in the courts. Republicans could have fun with this and say, “ok fine, there are two sexes by law and they are equal by statute, and all these attempts to allow men to call themselves women violate the law.”
I think Republicans should dare Democrats to except the legitimacy of two sexes to be equal.
Of course Biden has no awareness of what day it is. But what about Vice President Harris, what's her excuse? She was given a Billion dollars and a 3 month platform to make the case for a Constitution Convention, why not take up the matter then? Instead she spent her entire campaign either drunk, or twerking or going on Call Her Daddy. When you think of all the time, and money that's been squandered. And then now, at the 11th hour, as the door is about to hit you, "Oh by way, Equal Rights, yeah, let's do some Equal Rights".
Biden surrendering the argument on sexes and genders to the Republicans, now that his Title IX changes were struck by the courts, is that the strategy? Or is his strategy just to show how demented he is?
The left want men in women's private spaces,
AOC and her cabal of jerks are now saying that if we remove men from women's private spaces - it will cause MORE! abuse... like forced vaginal inspections.
The left are not serious - they are dangerous--- and insane.
The two sexes: male and female, are equal in rights and complementary in Nature.
The two genders (i.e. sex-correlated attributes): masculine and feminine, are just complementary in Nature.
The transgender spectrum is politically congruent ("=").
Abortion is homicide. Elective abortion past six weeks is premeditated murder under statutory law in all 50 states. Planned parenthood following conception is a hate crime with Loving.
Is Biden thinking of the status of sexual orientations under Democratic law? Most people still think pedophilia is queer and reject its equitable inclusion out of hand.
An individual and his or her sex are not physically severable. Gender can be simulated through surgical, medical, or psycho-atric ("grooming") corruption.
As I wrote yesterday- inside of 25 years it will accepted legal practice to amend The Constitution by presidential and judicial fiat (we are already long way down the path of judicial fiat in this regard).
"you throw at the wall whatever you can."
You go to war with the army you have.
Without amendment, The Constitution recognizes diversity of individuals, minority of one, and our Posterity (i.e. one man, one woman, and baby in evolutionary terms).
It boggles the mind that a product of Biden’s demented thinking that is contrary to reality would be treated “seriously” by the NYT buttressed by Tribe who went off the deep end long ago. If there is a scintilla of doubt remaining about the leftmedia and their Democrats consorts being batshit crazy it is only a tribute to our love for relatives who buy their nonsense.
They are encouraging women to test the matter by starting to bring lawsuits citing the Equal Rights Amendment, with the goal of ultimately forcing the Supreme Court to decide those cases, and in the process establish whether the amendment itself has any force.
“Any person who was incarcerated because they brought their 10-year-old across state lines for abortion services would have a right of action now,” Ms. Gillibrand said. “Every example we’ve seen in red and purple states across the country where women are being denied the right to privacy, travel, now has a clear right of action, and it will ultimately be decided in the courts.
What’s the rationale here? Given men can get pregnant, and abortion laws apply to both men and women, how would the ERA come into play?
I remember in the early days of the attempt to pass the ERA, one of the arguments that people opposed to it used was that it would force the government to let men into women's bathrooms and locker rooms.
We now have even more proof that and ERA wasn't necessary.
"what did it do?"
First off it gave Larry (of what tribe) and excuse to make a small payday.
Biden is irrelevant if this represents the emerging thinking of the cabal and millions of their toadies.
I dare Larry to explain what the hell he is talking about.
"Republicans" don't have to do anything. The very first lawsuit that challenges any action based on the purported Equal Rights Amendment will end this nonsense. Even in the DC Circuit.
"Speaker Johnson ...says he didn't think Biden was lying to him. He believed Biden honestly didn't know/remember what he had done just 3 weeks prior."
A plausible explanation.
Here is another:
Edgar Bergen did not bother telling Charlie McCarthy what Charlie was about to say on stage.
Well as long as we are talking pasta, I'll assert that Professor Tribe has meatballs for brains.
I hope some lefty somewhere brings a lawsuit claiming that the Amendment has been enacted and is in effect. While it’s possible that some outlier trial judge (see, e.g., Judge Merchan) might accept that claim, there’s no chance it would be accepted by the appeals courts, see Dillon v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 68 (1921), available at http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep256/usrep256368/usrep256368.pdf
256 U.S. 368
The DC Appeals Court would validate this amendment if the Democrats controlled SCOTUS. Because they don't control SCOTUS, they would rule against such a suit. It is only a matter of time before this view of the ERA is fully embraced at SCOTUS itself. The law in this country is being slowly dissolved.
When the facts on your side, you pound the facts. When the law is on your side, you pound the law. When neither is on your side, you pound the table.
Sounds like Tribe is emphasizing that this is not a (favorable) legal issue for his side.
"Their goal is to dare Republicans to challenge the legitimacy of sex equality, and of moving to nullify something as simple as equal rights for women."
What does that second clause even mean? Their goal is to dare Republicans to challenge the legitimacy ... of moving to nullify something? I guess they are paying the liars so much they can't afford editors any more.
LOL!
Anyone seeking to make the argument that Constitutional Law is where the law schools stuff their dullards could use Larry Tribe as exhibit #1.
Good. It’s the law of the land now. Men have no access to abortion because men can’t get pregnant. That’s a penumbra of law based on sex, which is now illegal. So either men can obtain abortions of pregnancies they don’t want, or women can’t have legal abortions.
Thanks to Biden every abortion will now involve expensive arbitration between both parents. Ladies, wave bye-bye to child support from the BF who doesn’t want kids.
I believe it was in The Apartment that Jack Lemmon used a tennis racket as a spaghetti strainer so make of that what you will.
"Run it up the flagpole, and see who salutes" might have been the more politically appealing phrasing. But, Biden declaring a new Amendment to the Constitution in his last week of office is messy, like the food on a pre-school cafeteria wall.
Larry Tribe threw his reputation and credibility against the wall, and none of it stuck. I have read many of Larry's social media rants about legal issues that leave me wondering how in the world is he allowed to teach constitutional law. And yes, he's an ardent neverTrumper too.
If I want credible answers to legal questions I read Jonathon Turley or Ann Althouse, not Larry Tribe.
I say it's broccoli, and to hell with it!
Is there anybody who doesn't think Laurence Tribe was the "legal authority" that Biden relied on to make his pronouncement? Tribe long ago gave up the law for politics, and watched while his reputation cratered. Kinda like Krugman, who gave up economics for politics.
The interesting thing is that dem leaders still rely on both of them for advice, which is why they are now in a ditch.
Interesting writing. She drops in the hard facts that make the answer to the question in the headline a resounding and unquestionable no gradually, one by one, as the story goes along instead of laying them out up front.
Trying to provide some hope for her readers to keep them reading?
"Kinda like Krugman, who gave up economics for politics."
Krugman is a failure in both spheres, as is Mr. Tribe.
Anyone on the left realize that if the ERA became law of the land it would require dismantling all preference programs for women as well as repealing Title IX
Tribe and his associates have a plan and a goal. It may be wrong sometimes, but the objective is clear. Contrast that to the Right, assuming you can find a Rightwing constitutional lawyer. Anyway, the Federal Judiciary alreay acts like there's an equal rights admendment. So, whether we get one via admendment is irrelevant. The standing constitutional convention we call the Supreme Court has decided men and women are equal and women have the right to blahdeblah.
"Anyone on the left realize that if the ERA became law of the land it would require dismantling all preference programs for women as well as repealing Title IX"
Do you live in the real world? LOL.
Given the well-known deterioration of his mental capacity, who cares what he thinks?
Are we talking about Biden, or Larry Tribe?
Just to be pedantic, they're 'linguine' (feminine), not 'linguini' (masculine).
Post a Comment