I don't know about the legal arguments but:
1. The monument is already political, and its hard to see how it can ever rise above its political origin.
2. Even if it is "designed to unite our nation," which I doubt, it's obviously not uniting us, and it's hard to see how it ever could.
3. It's not "beautiful and fitting" to me and to a lot of us Americans, and it shouldn't be built until there is far more consensus and desire for this immense thing in such a conspicuous and hallowed place.
Posts
108 comments:
“The Kennedy family argues the structure "will permanently cast shadows over and damage historically significant sightlines to the existing gravesites and memorials established in the Kennedy family's honor" at the cemetery.“
Does this mean the Kennedys will now actively oppose industrial wind energy? I doubt it.
When will these people go away and leave us alone? Kennedy family worship has been bad for this country. Ted Kennedy’s immigration bill was the beginning of the fundamental transformation of America.
Why is JFK a secular saint for the Left? He got us into Vietnam.
JFK brought the concept of celebrity worship to politics and that has been a horrible thing.
As to Ann’s last point, if Obama or Biden had proposed such a monument in this location, it would be universally praised. People oppose it because Trump proposed it.
…this is one more of a million points of asymmetry. These arguments against are meek and petty ‘I don’t like him’ parading as intellect. Next time some communist wants an ugly oscar the grouch trash can we’ll be saturation bombed with endless experts squealing with glee over the beauty…
…I think ‘we’ as a place can stop with the uniting talk. The choices are the personal freedom of a republic OR the collective kindergarten economics of communism and humanity re-learned in the 19th and 20th centuries centrally planned economies always struggle than fail while the populace suffers, so it isn’t much of a choice…
…the most irresponsible is This one. In person from the right angles it looks like a giant ass, though don’t ever admit that. Not allowed. Only worship of the beauty. It’s profoundly odd to see a dozen tourists surrounding it listening to a guide extoll the beauty…
I'm against the arch because it's like re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic.
Our nation is now Blue Hell - with Leftwing Authoritarianism on the rise each time a corrupt dem wins.
No time to celebrate with architecture.
Apparently JFK’s grave is the most important one that shall not be shadowed. Who knew?
People who voted for Trump and are happy with some of his good things - are pissed about Trump's ego. Like it or not.
People dont give a fuck, ann
They want shelter, food, fair paying jobs, and end to fighting israels wars.
Stop distracting. Cash your tips and pass the torch. The countrynis undergoing growth n pains and this old lady acts as if the arc is all we are railing against...
Silly silly girl. Follow your heart.
Stick to analyzing the brewers off season news. No need to jump into politics now that your Trump man has lost us.
Have we checked on poor white meade? Lol I know hoosiers...
Begley is Jewish at heart. Nttawwt
Does Trump deserve an Arch of Triumph?
The building of the arch will continue unless morale improves.
Just wait until Trump sues because the Dems want to modify the ballroom.
I'm not a fan of the arch but: (per Brave AI):
"The primary federal agencies with approval authority over the site and design of new public monuments and memorials in Washington, D.C. are the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA). The National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission (NCMAC) serves an advisory role, consulting with sponsors, Congress, and the Secretary of the Interior on policy and procedures for commemorative works."
Those entities have approved the proposed arch. In accordance with the procedures specified by Congress to address these issues. I don't make the rules.
As a constitutional law professor, professor, shouldn't this have at least some interest to you? "'I don't know about the legal argument', but I think it's icky and some people don't like it" is a massive cop out.
I’ll let the left put up their trash can in its place if we can agree to take down the trillion plus in entitlement fraud every year. Some monuments deserve to be torn down…
Every other monument in DC unites. This one doesn’t because of the process, or lack thereof, more than the aesthetics, or lack thereof. The law says Congress must approve such a project. Follow the law. Certainly great proponents of the rule of law like Dave can understand the importance of this.
“Who are these dopes asking for four giant heads in the mountains of South Dakota? There’s no consensus. I don’t think anyone really wants Mt Rushmore defaced this way! Like future Americans are going to drive hundreds of miles to see Jefferson’s nose jutting out from a mountainside.
“Ridiculous.”
The monument is already political, and its hard to see how it can ever rise above its political origin.
…I can see it no problem but all y’all will need to be pushing up daisies after your natural lifespan of hate…
The monument is already political, and its hard to see how it can ever rise above its political origin.
…I can see it no problem but all y’all will need to be pushing up daisies after your natural lifespan of hate…
…funny how easy it is to fall in love with ineffective government when it stops stuff we don't want…
“Every other monument in DC” was in disrepair and the fountains broken and many were tagged up with leftist symbols. Trump should raise the arch as a capstone to other good works he’s performed on greater DC.
By the way, who gave the mobs permission to destroy the things Trump has been repairing?
Boatbuilder. Congress must also approve the project in addition to the agencies you mention which are controlled by the president. Why doesn’t that matter to you.
Once the corruptocrats get back in., DC will be a crime-ridden shit show again.
Trump's arch - imagine the vandalism.
"Does this mean the Kennedys will now actively oppose industrial wind energy? I doubt it."
It does, if it means it blocks their family their families views and recreation....
"However, the Kennedy family opposed the project for years. Back in 2006, then-Sen. Ted Kennedy called for more federal guidelines first. “Senator Kennedy has real environmental and economic concerns, and the federal government continues to lack a national policy and process to guide offshore alternative energy development,” spokeswoman Melissa Wagoner told The Washington Times."
https://www.foxnews.com/us/kennedys-kochs-help-kill-planned-wind-farm-off-cape-cod
ForestwithouttreeS said...
Every other monument in DC unites. This one doesn’t because of the process, or lack thereof, more than the aesthetics, or lack thereof. The law says Congress must approve such a project. Follow the law. Certainly great proponents of the rule of law like Dave can understand the importance of this.
11/11/26, 7:02 AM
What about the ones you tore the statues off of?
Charlie Kirk also tried to unite our nation.
They’re not having it.
Some build. Others tear down. A third group stands on the sidelines waiting fur unity.
That would be called criminal vandalism Rusty. Like what Trump when he destroyed the East Wing.
Nothing Trump can do will unite this nation. Half the nation hates that he's still breathing. They literally want him dead, and any of us who voted for him.
When your audience is just waiting for your next word to scream "kill them all", there's not much you can do other than focus on your goals and get shit done.
Personally I think the arch is too big and out of proportion to its setting. But I think the purpose of the arch is to draw enemy fire so the ballroom can be finished without more meddling.
"As to Ann’s last point, if Obama or Biden had proposed such a monument in this location, it would be universally praised. People oppose it because Trump proposed it."
Don't you ever get tired of making arguments in this format?
Clearly, I don't like the arch, and if you think I'd like it if Biden had proposed it, you're ignoring 22+ years of public writing on this blog.
I don't know how you can dish out the usual trite argument here.
Maybe, now that we know so much about JFK's sexual depredations, his grave should be moved.
As for the other monuments in Washington, DC, I notice they're clean now, instead of yellow, grimy, and covered with graffiti. Maybe all the traditionalist / preservationist naysayers can inform us why they got to that state.
“Don't you ever get tired of making arguments in this format?”
…I don’t see in his comment where you are accused of making the argument you seem to think he made about you, though I wouldn’t mind seeing where you argued differently somewhere in the 22+ years of writing on this blog. I’d try to hunt myself but the rickety structure of Blogger is not conducive to relevant search…
“Don't you ever get tired of making arguments in this format?”
…I don’t see in his comment where you are accused of making the argument you seem to think he made about you, though I wouldn’t mind seeing where you argued differently somewhere in the 22+ years of writing on this blog. I’d try to hunt myself but the rickety structure of Blogger is not conducive to relevant search…
The Question you have to ask yourself is- “If this were proposed by Barack Obama, what would be the reaction?”
We will unite our nation under the banner of leftwing progressive authoritarian one party rule.
as a backlash to Trump.
“The law says Congress must approve such a project.”
…which law is that?
"until there is far more consensus and desire for this immense thing in such a conspicuous and hallowed place."
Meade must hear this a lot....CC, JSM
Charlie Kirk has been so lied about and vilified - the left cult can do nothing but mock and celebrate his murder.
Now the corrupt Democrat Judge in charge of the case will obey the Mob masters - and the paid off roof top killer, will get away with his crime.
…it’s an important distinction because the left has a nasty habit of subverting the judiciary when the law impedes their desires, Hawaiian judges ignoring jurisprudence and failure to interpret existing laws, sometimes inventing words with legal meaning like ‘insurrection’ while promoting their legal authority, or in the case of the White House improvements applying legal process that isn’t applicable while publicly promoting that it is…
Ann:
I get that you oppose the Arch and I respect that. My point is the Kennedy family and the Left solely oppose it because Trump proposed it. I’m emphasizing how TDS has perverted political discourse in this country. The Venezuela thing is a perfect example. Same with Greenland. Great results for the US, but condemned by the Dems because of Trump. Trump has driven the Dems insane and irrational.
A good point was made by a commenter here about the rule of law. Apparently, this Arch needs approvals from some government entities and that hasn’t been done. Judge Chutkin cites the laws in her opinion. But I’m suspicious because she has TDS. If I had time, I’d read the DOJ brief.
If, in fact, approvals are needed and Trump is pushing this despite the law then this is another fucking stupid mistake by Trump. I don’t know why he does stuff like this. He’s got his ballroom.
Trump needs to finish off Iran. Control what he can control. Focus his Executive energy in these last two years.
I’ve never been to Arlington National Cemetery. I don’t understand why this is a terrible location. I stand on my main point: Follow the law.
BTW, I hope I live long enough to see President Rubio redecorate the WH and remove most of that gold. Tacky.
I don’t worship Trump like the Dems worship JFK and Obama.
Last night I called the Bidens ROCINOs (Roman Catholics In Name Only). Today it's the Kennedys' turn. Real RC's would want their graves in perpetual shadow. Especially the Irish. It's the Emerald Isle because it rains all the damn time...CC, JSM
The law is 40 USC 8106. It could not be more clear. “Express authority of Congress” is required to erect buildings or structures on public grounds in DC. I’m eager to hear your theory as to why it doesn’t apply.
Yo Forest--I told you what the law is--as established by...Congress. Where do you get the idea that there is some other level of Congressional approval required?
Trump should be universally praised for cleaning up the DC monuments. Instead we got that crazy reflecting pool controversy.
The world is full of hideous monuments. Some become endearing over time.
I think Trump's Arch has a better chance of redemption than the Obama high-rise Super Max in Chi Town (second only to the high-rise in Manhattan, known as UN Headquarters).
40 USC 8106. Is not the establishment and authorization of the NCPC, the CFA and the NCMAC "express authority?"
"Authority" is not by any stretch the same thing as "approval." If you think a little about it you might understand.
Do I have this right Dave? Courts that rule against Trump have TDS. Since they have TDS there is no reason to even see what they have to say. You do understand the illogical nature of your argument I hope. That would be step 1 in extricating yourself from the cult of maga.
“40 U.S. Code § 8106 prohibits the erection of any building or structure on federal reservations, parks, or public grounds in the District of Columbia without the express authority of Congress.
Key Details
• Scope: Applies to any federal reservation, park, or public ground located in the District of Columbia.
• Restriction: No building or structure may be constructed there.
• Exception: Construction is allowed only if Congress provides express authority.”
Case closed. Another stupid mistake by Trump.
WH ballroom probably different because it is the Executive Mansion. Separation of powers. And Congress never stopped Truman, Obama etc. A basketball court is a structure.
Begley: "I hope I live long enough to see President Rubio redecorate the WH and remove most of that gold."
For some reason, I think Rubio, left completely to his own devices, would turn the West Wing into a cube farm.
Weirdly, the 7th Floor of the Truman Building (Main State), where the SecState has his/her offices, is decorated in Colonial/neoclassical style, even though the building itself is International Style. I'm sure Rubio, from the first time he went there as a Senator, has been thinking 'why the fuck did they do that!?' CC, JSM
Hegseth or Cruz would turn the Oval into a cigar lounge. I don't even know if either of them smokes, but they definitely give off the cigar-guy vibe. CC, JSM
RFK Jr would have a pull-up bar in one corner, and turn the Lewinsky Room (the little pantry off one side of the Oval) into a walk-in meat locker for any roadkill he found on his travels. CC, JSM
Of course authority means approval/consent. What do you think it means?
Forest:
You misunderstand my point. There have been many cases where the Court of Appeals have reversed trial court decisions as being wrong on the law. TDS has infected many judges and their ability to get the law right.
Judge Chutkin may be correct in this case, but I’m wary of her decision based upon some of her other decisions. The law has become way too politicized. That’s why the Dems want to pack SCOTUS.
"WH ballroom probably different because it is the Executive Mansion. Separation of powers. And Congress never stopped Truman, Obama etc. A basketball court is a structure."
Did congress appropriate money specifically for the Truman rebuild?
Dave - Ballroom is exactly the same. The case lost on standing. If Congress had brought the case it would have certainly won. But the republicans are totally okay with trump’s egregious violations of the law. Obviously the voters are not. Reason for hope.
…thanks Dave. Is the monument up yet? Would the Antiquities Act prevent a future executive from demolition?
…well we’ve been over that one- the executive has unique authority over The White House specifically….
https://savingplaces.org/monumental-arch#:~:text=On%20November%205%2C%202026%2C%20the,while%20the%20court%20considers%20challenges.
This posting, by an organization opposed to the project, seems to correctly state the process which was followed--including the public comment period--and the approvals obtained.
Nobody seems to have posted the actual decision by Judge Chutkan, but I'm having a hard time finding anyone, or any article, telling me what laws Trump has not followed here. Begles says "Apparently, this Arch needs approvals from some government entities and that hasn’t been done. Judge Chutkin cites the laws in her opinion." That does not seem to be correct. Chutkan has issued a 14-day restraining order and seems to believe that the project requires her approval.
I don't like the arch, but I didn't object to it; the proper procedures have been followed. I have a real problem with last-minute lawfare. Either we follow the rules or we don't.
I am of the firm conviction that the sole Constitution remedy for a supposed ultra vires act of the president is impeachment. The idea that the courts have veto power over a presidential act is nonsense.
"Of course authority means approval/consent. What do you think it means?"
I did say that if you think about it you will understand. I overestimated your abilities.
Do you think that Congress has to "approve" every action by the FCC? The SEC? OSHA? Or does Congress just "authorize" those agencies?
"Authorization" is not the same thing as "approval." Nor is it the same thing as "consent." Neither of the terms that you rely on appears in the statute.
'...Even if it is "designed to unite our nation," which I doubt, it's obviously not uniting us, and it's hard to see how it ever could....'
How could it? Trump has been faced with an irrational, unyielding, resolute opposition since the day he first ran. He's been treated like an apostate to the Democrat religion, because he had the temerity to leave the blue church without regret.
“Don't you ever get tired of making arguments in this format?”
You have attacked the straw man.
What about the argument that the applicable law as established by Congress has been followed here? Isn't that the Constitutional issue?
Trump says new arch will also deploy drones, position snipers and store ammo ~ FOX News
šš©š¦ 250-š§š°š°šµ š“šµš³š¶š¤šµš¶š³š¦ šøš°š¶šš„ š„š¦š±šš°šŗ š„š³š°šÆš¦š“, š±š°š“šŖšµšŖš°šÆ š“šÆšŖš±š¦š³š“ š¢šÆš„ š“šµš°š³š¦ š¢š®š®š¶šÆšŖšµšŖš°šÆ š¢šµ šµš©š¦ š³š¦š²š¶š¦š“šµ š°š§ šµš©š¦ š®šŖššŖšµš¢š³šŗ
Trump pulls out his 'National Security' chestnut..
What you need in modern warfare is a heavily armed Triumphal Arch.
In no way is this a sign of absolute madness. Mental Health Patients have been sectioned for less than this. Apparently, the line between national security and national absurdity has disappeared.
…once the thing is up wouldn’t it’s status be protected by other laws and acts? It would take more than a Hawaiian judge’s order to take it down, at least if it was erected by a Democrat executive but why should that matter?
So are you against trump now that he is unpopular?
Even in old age, you pretty white ladies keep changing your minds to appease the powerful...
Haven't you developed any independent values or principles to guide you other than glomming on to the current strongman in power? Cmon grrrl, it's 2026. You dont have to do that to feed yourself today! Grow a pair?
DC has enough monuments already and they haven't been doing much good. There might be a case for building a monument somewhere else. There might also be a case for suing the Kennedys for polluting our public life for 90 years.
Like the killer in the Texas tower, the government could shoot down on its people and effectively eliminate protesters like Renee Good, Alex Pretti and thr forgotten darker people killed by the US government...
And silly boomers like dave and annie are haggling g over an arch of triumph being built.
Best stay in, have your groceries delivered and not venture out? You dont know your own country of you think the arch has people concerned...
Merging our jilitary with Israel is what all the kids are talking about today, old boomer. You're out of touch hanging with the begleys of the blog, but I can see ypur attraction to his disposable income for tips...
No to worry IUD(D) - Peggy Flannigan left will use the militarized Arch against US citizens who refuse to obey their leftist diktats.
Just give Trump a special Presidential LEGO™️ set.
It’s like when I was a kid and I’d sit under my bed with pencil and paper, drawing cars equipped with missile launchers and machine guns. I’d spend hours working on them, then proudly bring them out to show my parents over dinner that evening.
“Well done, son! That’s brilliant. Really love the attention to detail on those big piles of sniper ammunition. You’ve clearly got a talent for this!”
Per Grok the kennedy grave is .73 miles from the arch.
Can someone explain how it will cast shade from that far away?
Unless the shade is metaphorical. Trump got stuff done. Kennedy, like Obama, was mainly just a talker. Is Trump casting shade on Kennedy with the reminder of this?
John Henry
…the left loves to get away with legal chestnuts. They smirk and cackle as they add their get-away-with-its to legal precedent...until it’s their enemy getting away with one then its ‘obey the law! Hawaiian judge rules!’. More of that trite asymmetry…
Ann:
Would you concede that there are many members of the Democrat party - elected and unelected - and the media who have an irrational hatred of Donald Trump and just reflexively oppose anything he does; even if it is objectively good for the nation?
The prime example is taking out Iran's ability to build a nuclear bomb. The next best example was the forced extradition of Maduro of VZ. Reducing crime to a new low is another thing reasonable people would agree is a good thing. I'd add closing the border but the Dems think that open borders was a good thing.
Thank a US military veteran for their service to the country today. Also, thank a current member of the US military for their service and for putting up with our current civilian leadership.
…let him build it then y’all can go tear it down and hit it with your shoe…
I've been to Kennedy's grave. I probably cast a shadow on it. Bad, bad me.
Not only would the arch be the better part of a mile away, its site is about a hundred feet lower and bears ENE from JFK. The shadow would be cast only just after sunrise for a couple of weeks in June, and would be long gone by the time the cemetery opens at 8.
IEE: “… thank a current member of the US military for their service and for putting up with our current civilian leadership.” And thank them for helping to exceed enlistment quotas that had gone unmet under the previous civilian leadership.”
“Shadow on the grave?” Seriously? This is the latest Trump bait for goons and here’s some new evidence. Trump is succeeding in exposing Democrats and their consorts as ignorant and batshit crazy. Trouble is, as the latest election shows, they can muster enough votes by hook or by crook to take over the country. We are in deep shit now!
Marilyn Monroe has cast a far longer shade on the grave of JFK than any of Trump's erections.....So far as the arch itself goes, it looks a bit hyperbolic, but the same could be said for the Arc de Triomphe or the Eiffel Tower. Who can say how posterity will judge it? Ditto for Obama's Library.........All those beautiful boulevards in Paris are the enduring handiwork of Napoleon III. Hundreds of thousands of poor people were forcibly relocated from their domiciles in order to create the beauty of Paris. Fortunately the proles then were all white so no lasting harm was done........The Arc de Triomphe celebrates Napoleon's many victories. At the end of the Napoleonic Wars, thirty percent of military aged males in Frances were either dead or disabled.
So the Kennedy's think they have not only air rights above JFK's grave, but that these rights extend to the path of the sun?
I’m inclined to agree with Prof. Althouse that the arch should not proceed, although our reasons may diverge slightly.
Most major Washington monuments have political origins and many were controversial when first proposed. So, I wouldn't assume that this arch could never win people over later.
But an enormous, permanent addition to such a historically significant landscape seems to warrant more than the preferences of a particular administration or president. The proposed arch would also disrupt historic views connecting the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery where generations of Americans who served our country are buried. I worry that it would diminish the dignity and solemnity of that setting.
A project of this magnitude calls for clear congressional authorization, careful review of its design and location, and at least a reasonable prospect of lasting public support.
That should be true no matter which president proposes the monument. Given the serious legal questions and substantial controversy, I think Professor Althouse’s conclusion that the project should not proceed at this point is reasonable.
…from the looks of things future civilizations may appreciate the monument as the end of an era, the period ending 250 years of freedom. The coda, DC al fine of the semiquincentennial. The new guys can replace it with some Year Zero thingie….
^^ Your Text is AI/GPT Generated 92.4%
AI GPT*
The, casting a shadow, argument is interesting. They actually have a law in California called the Solar Shade Control Act. You can actually sue your neighbor if any of their trees start to block more than 10% of your solar panels from the sunlight during peak solar generation hours. (And then they will be forced to prune the trees back.)
"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men..."
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...
An Obama/Biden supporter just said this without any self awareness.
Obama tried his best to get me killed. Fuck you and fuck anyone who supported Obama or Biden.
Veterans hate you.
…in what I still believe is one of the mist constructive government agencies, certainly tops in Massachusetts, The Boston Redevelopment Authority nixed (and to this day may still nix) any building proposal that casts shadows across any major or minor parks and open space, and not just as an excuse to kill development…
“Trump is succeeding in exposing Democrats and their consorts as ignorant and batshit crazy”
..I’ve been invited to accept anything batshit crazy as new and the solution to all my problems…
I seem to be shouting in the wilderness that all of the objections to the arch have previously been made (OK, maybe not the JFK shadow claim) and the opponents lost, in the forum which Congress established for the authorization of such things. Which invited public comment and has addressed the objections in its decision.
This lawsuit is just a last-ditch attempt to re-litigate what has been decided by the tribunal which has been authorized by Congress to decide such things.
Why have commissions explicitly designated to make these decisions, if a judge can reverse them on a whim?
Peaceful Worrier--you, like Althouse, are a day late and a dollar short.
Not to mention that the gravesite would spend considerably less time in the shadow of Trump's arch than it already does in the shadow of Robert E. Lee's house.
…which Kennedy’s joined the lawsuit besides President John? The ones with political gravitas are dead and the rest are dead, on parole or still making the girls coo when they walk into a Boston Starbucks…
Isn't there an eternal flame at the gravesite? Just crank up the gas a bit, shadow problem all gone.
I see you boatbuilder…
"Trump shall not build an arch for the US because he is a man of political war and has shed blood." 1 Althouse 28:3
I'm opposed to a serial adulterer and sexual deviant who habitually lied to the US to have some kind of monument persist in our national capital. We should thus move Kennedy's grave to some less prominent place in Massachusetts.
I'm opposed to a serial adulterer and sexual deviant who habitually lied to the US to have some kind of monument persist in our national capital. We should thus move Kennedy's grave to some less prominent place in Massachusetts.
So no Trump monuments ever?
The difference between JFK and Trump (both nepobabies) is that JFK served his country honorably in combat.
Seriously, his heroics were truly, truly heroic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrol_torpedo_boat_PT-109
Trump did all the serial adultery and sexual deviance but none of the "hero shit." Trump bribed his podiatrist to diagnosis him with "bone spurs" so that he could evade service. There is no honor for draft dodgers and there should certainly be no monuments for cowardly rat fuckers like Donnie.
Paddy O, the soldiers filing suit against the arch make a similar argument. Their objections concern the physical place and its emotional significance, not the president's personality.
https://www.armytimes.com/pentagon/2026/11/06/judge-stops-construction-of-arch-at-arlington-national-cemetery-as-key-committee-votes-to-approve/?
ForestwithouttreeS said...
Do I have this right Dave? Courts that rule against Trump have TDS. Since they have TDS there is no reason to even see what they have to say. You do understand the illogical nature of your argument I hope. That would be step 1 in extricating yourself from the cult of maga.
You do know, of course, that not all opinions deserve equal weight.
ForestwithouttreeS said...
That would be called criminal vandalism Rusty. Like what Trump when he destroyed the East Wing.
But you praised it at the time.
Yes and something better is going to replace it. What are going to replace the destroyed statues with.
“If this were proposed by Barack Obama, what would be the reaction?”
The MAGA crowd would be crying foul and the democrats would support Obama violating the statutes. Next question.
“The MAGA crowd would be crying foul and the democrats would support Obama violating the statutes. Next question.”
…something I never get to say- I agree with D.D. Driver! Next question…
rejahm 1:38 pm.
I appreciate it. I often feel like I'm just talking to myself (and often I'm correct. I seem to be the primary fan of my own jokes, for one thing, which makes me feel right at home).
This is, at least nominally, a blog run by a professor of constitutional law.
It seems like things are often more focused on clothing, sex, aesthetics and grammar, which is fine, it's not my blog, but when a constitutional issue is right there staring you in the face maybe a word or two of acknowledgment that there could be a guiding constitutional principle would be nice.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
1. The monument is already political, and its hard to see how it can ever rise above its political origin.
Which means the judiciary has no role. 1 pt for Trump.
2. Even if it is "designed to unite our nation," which I doubt, it's obviously not uniting us, and it's hard to see how it ever could.
The fact that Democrats are lunatics does not give them special political / judicial rights. Pt 2 for Trump
3. It's not "beautiful and fitting" to me and to a lot of us Americans
So what? There's only one President at a time, and you're not it.
and it shouldn't be built until there is far more consensus and desire for this immense thing in such a conspicuous and hallowed place.
That argument died for all time with ObamaCare.
The Left has forced its way on America many times. Therefore the Left has NO right to object when anyone else forces our way on them.
If you wanted a nation where "consensus" matters, you shouldn't have decided to ever use your political power to trample us when there was no "consensus"
…bb, I and I’m sure others here appreciate your comments. Blog host been out of the lawblog business for a while now. I like that other legal minds show up to try and cut through the politics…
Rehajm,
Althouse has been out of the law *professor* business for a while now, but - - I've been here since the very early days and I don't recall once ever seeing her present it as a law blog.
…Kirk wasn’t there a separate section for con law posts bitd - there was a click thru at the top of the page, right? but yah though law commentary sometimes showed up here it was whatever met her interest…
…there hasn’t been much con law commentary in recent years. Probably for the same reasons I stay away from finance posts- on the internet everyone’s an expert…
I recall a time when the masthead motto read something like "Politics... And the aversion to politics"
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.