TPMDC
« Republican Strategist Cites Rosen Article In Attack On Sotomayor | Home | SEIU Ad Hits Schwarzenegger, Doesn't Criticize Obama »

John Yoo Warns Against "Results-Oriented" Sotomayor

John Yoo, the former Justice Department official who helped craft the legal rationales for the Bush Administration's "enhanced interrogation" regime, has come out strongly against Sonia Sotomayor -- on the grounds that she could decide cases on the basis of outcomes rather than the law:

Conservatives should defend the Supreme Court as a place where cases are decided by a faithful application of the Constitution, not personal politics, backgrounds, and feelings. Republican senators will have to conduct thorough questioning in the confirmation hearings to make sure that she will not be a results-oriented voter, voting her emotions and politics rather than the law.

In other breaking news, John Yoo has absolutely no sense of self-awareness.


88 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

If John Yoo disapproves, she must be good.

user-pic

Exactly my thought. F-Yoo!

user-pic

Good handle (push me-pull you)
Sounds like Obama's strateigery

user-pic

Yep!

user-pic

His criticism is equal to a resounding endorsement indeed!

user-pic

How is it that any comment from Yoo elicits any response other than derisive laughter?

user-pic

voting her emotions

WTF?

So we have Rosen raising issues about her "temperament". Turley raising issues about her "intelligence". And this loathsome slime (however little self-awareness he has) talking about her voting her emotions????

So basically, the underlying smear is that she's a not very bright jurist who is tempermental and emotional.

I don't remember, ever, the issue of temperment and voting on one's emotions being raised with previous nominees. Ever.

I realize there's a lot of posturing going on, but this trend is nauseating. Can a comment about her "hot-blooded" ancestry be far off?

user-pic

Psst, she's also a she.

user-pic

hence Woo bringing up the emotional stereotype. What a complete a-hole, that Woo.

user-pic

heh, Yoo.

user-pic

Woo is just hedging his bets regarding his his final appeal should he actually be tried for his role in the torture issue.

user-pic

Yoo should be very very careful about upsetting the woman who may hear his appeal for his war crime convictions.

Also, read between the lines. Her "temperment" (funny, that was never an issue with, ahem, "ambassador" Bolton) is code for "hot latin attitude".

I'm loving watching Limpbaugh and his ilk squirm. A working-class hispanic democratic woman. I just wish she were a lesbian!!!

user-pic

I believe that would be the Repubics definition of a woman. Stoopid, emotional, be-otch.

user-pic

No, Turley did not question her intelligence. He said that her opinions lacked intellectual depth, which is a very different thing. Turley says up front that she is obviously highly intelligent. But crafting legal opinions with intellectual depth requires intellectual vision, and not every highly intelligent person has that sort of vision.

Now, it's entirely possible that she has been constrained because she has been working at the appeals court level, and that without those constraints, she will find her own judicial voice and make a distinctive mark on the Court. But that is a gamble; it could just as well turn out the other way.

There's no doubt that she is qualified to sit on the Court; Turley and Rosen were simply questioning whether she was the best of the short list candidates. But that question is now moot; whatever the relative merit of the others, Sotomayor is the nominee.

user-pic

Good point. Turley (and a lot of people, including me) want a liberal alternative to Scalia -- an intellectual warrior of the left.

That Obama did not appoint such a person as his first SCOTUS nominee is not really surprising, as he himself is governing as a moderate extraordinaire.

Obama is an enigma, as much as we'd all like to think we know him. He doesn't fit easily into any pigeonhole, and that makes people on both the right and the left CRAZY!

user-pic

A liberal equivalent of Scalia?
How about we get another Brennan instead?
When intellectual depth precludes humility and decency, it is a cost, not a benefit.

user-pic

Marvellous - are we talking intellectual depth a la Scalia? That's a bug, not a feature.
We don't need any more Justices exclaiming that the Court of Last Resort is simply too important to sully their hands hearing a death penalty case in which the appellant had clear evidence of innocence - and was put to death when the appeal was denied.

user-pic

Well with all due respect, Jonathan Turley is not a legal scholar in anyone's mind and not the last word. I suggest you all checkout scotus.org. Maybe you might change your mind.


Jonathan Turley is the most negative guy I have ever seen. This is nothing new with him.

user-pic

Are you as sick of Jonathan Turley as I am. This guy doesn't like anyone.

He is such a doomsday guy.
\
What do you expect from a professor?

user-pic

John Yoo is worried about "faithful application" and "the correct reading" of the Constitution.

And Wile E. Coyote just caught the Roadrunner.

user-pic

One of the official new talking points, per some fascist think tank with a deceptively benign name asshat former clerk of Scalia's, is that this nomination shows the danger to the Republic of Obama's "lawless empathy standard." He went on and on about it and if he used that phrase once, he used it a thousand times. So we'll be hearing a lot about "lawless empathy standard" and "feelings" over the next month. Its yet another turn of phrase that the Republicans have fantasized themselves into believing is a game changer.

But yeah, Yoo doesn't care much for or about feelings. As long as you stay on this side of inducing death or organ failure, its all good.

user-pic

What does a "lawless empathy standard" even mean?

That if there's an "empathy standard" (a big if) it is inherently "lawless"?

Huh?

user-pic

And while I'm asking legal questions, what does "judicial temperament" typically mean? I thought it meant, in some sort of vague way, that if someone had the "right sort of judicial temperament" that their rulings were reasonably consistent and not all over the judicial map.

(And since I'm not a lawyer, my understanding of "judicial map" is pretty vague, as well).

Samuel Alito was described as having the "right judicial temperament", as was Ruth Ginbsburg, as I discovered after some digging, but Rosen raised the question of temperament wrt to Sotomayor, and Yoo-Hoo talks about "emotions", and I started to wonder if "temperament" meant exactly what it means outside of the legal system?

user-pic

And while I'm asking legal questions, what does "judicial temperament" typically mean?

There is a pretty good essay on that here. (PDF)

user-pic

I think this contrasts with lawless lack of empathy -- like someone who tailors a legal opinion to allow torture even though torture is against the law.

user-pic

Why do I hear Morris Albert in my head. "Feelings, nothing more than feelings."

user-pic

Damn, there goes another perfectly good irony meter. I guess I need a special Republican-shielded model.

And Yoo should be disbarred, if not imprisoned.

user-pic

Exactly. The larger question, not really addressed in this thread, is:
Why is this war criminal still freely moving about the country? What the hell is wrong with this picture?

user-pic

I just can't get past that headline: "Empathy Trumps Over Excellence". I guess ideology trumps over coherence, too.

user-pic

And Yoo didn't establish that claim at all. In fact he more or less negated it when he said, my emphasis:

Obama had some truly outstanding legal intellectuals and judges to choose from—Cass Sunstein, Elena Kagan, and Diane Wood come immediately to mind. The White House chose a judge distinguished from the other members of that list only by her race.

So she's a GOOD as the other options, according to Yoo. That means no sacrifice of excellence, according to Yoo. Maybe he didn't write the title, could have been "editor's choice day"?

user-pic

Would Yoo have said that had she , with all other qualifications being equal, been Asian?

user-pic

Are you suggesting that Yoo would exhibit same-race-affinity in that context, and thus not object?

I don't know why he wouldn't object, if the nominee were otherwise exactly the same as S on all counts.

user-pic

Yoo whoo! A low profile is in order especially when the topic is empathy, an area in which you appear to have little expertise.

user-pic

Can I advocate the castration of Yoo as a means of getting Alberto VO5 Gonzales to talk?

user-pic

No as you appear to be a neuroproctologist not a uropsychologist.

user-pic

What does John Yoo know about "faithful application of the Constitution?"

user-pic

There was a handy link with his email address, so I wrote him a short note:

Mr. Yoo

It would make perfect sense for the author of the infamous "Torture Memos" to completely misunderstand the meaning of the word "Empathy". Empathy is not the same as sympathy, nor is it a bias or making a decision on "feelings". The fact that you are opposed to this nomination makes me more confident that I can trust this president's judgement. I hope you will someday feel at minimum some regret, if not sympathy, for the people who were tortured because of your lack of empathy or understanding of the law and the constitution.

May God have mercy on your soul.

user-pic

Good letter.

I'm betting that he has filtered his email to block any missives that contain the word 'torture.' In his mind the word does not exist because Republicans don't do it.

user-pic

"Judicial temperament" refers to a judge's ability to patiently hear every side of an issue with an open mind; to avoid making snap judgments and to humbly examine legal precedents before forming an opinion. Few judges have it.

user-pic

Hmmm. Here's a woman who kicked and stomped her way through Princeton (! the most sexist Ivy?), Yale Law School as editor of law review (!), and on to the bench.

I'm betting she eats everyone's lunch at the confirmation hearings. And then kicks everyone in the balls and writes insults on their foreheads.

Metaphorically, of course.

user-pic

Why just metaphorically?

user-pic

Why is this war criminal saying anything about anyone?

user-pic

My favorite Yoo'ism from his article?

"Republican senators will have to conduct thorough questioning in the confirmation hearings to make sure that she will not be a results-oriented voter, voting her emotions and politics rather than the law."

Yoo himself is well familiar with this "emotions and the law" issue, having decided it is okay to disregard the law and allow torture IF you have the emotion of being absolutely terrorized by terrorism (or perhaps just terrorized by Cheney?).

user-pic

The master of "results-oriented" memo writing, John Yoo.

user-pic

ha!

user-pic

Look....we dropped Napalm and Agent Orange all over Vietnam right on top of civilians.

Is waterboarding worse than that?

We don't torture...that's our motto.

Yet it seems that we settle most problems with violence.

Violence against civilians and the innocent.

As long as it's not happening to us...that's the language of Empire.

Of course Yoo is against the nominee.
He shills for those who aspire to Empire.

user-pic

Snide remarks fail me.

user-pic

I'm just going to love watching the Republicans squirm over this nomination. How can one not enjoy their continuing descent into impotent rage and bewilderment?

user-pic

How Republicans can continue to present themselves as impartial opponents of "results-oriented" judging, AFTER Bush v. Gore...

user-pic

Indeed. A decision that those writing it knew was so bad that they explicitly ruled it out as a valid precedent for any future case.

user-pic

Beats me.

Stevens couldn't fathom it either in his dissent:

"Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."

What a smarty-mouth, huh? :)

user-pic

Let me see... "outcomes rather than the law". Oh, that would be like the Gore vs. Bush decision, right?

user-pic

"Conservatives should defend the Supreme Court as a place where cases are decided by a faithful application of the Constitution, not personal politics, backgrounds, and feelings. Republican senators will have to conduct thorough questioning, including properly vetted enhanced interrogation techniques faithfully designed by yours truly and overseen by Vice President Cheney so as to pass constitutional muster, in the confirmation hearings to make sure that she will not be a results-oriented voter, voting her emotions and politics rather than the law."

Can we make Yoo and Cheney cellmates...

user-pic

Eff Yoo.

user-pic

Looks like I was a little late on that one, PMPY.

user-pic

Yoo? hasn't he been disbarred yet? for writing torture memos that helped the Bush administration cause untold suffering and death in Iraq and elsewhere.

His notoriety should make him keep his mouth shut but no, he follows in Cheney's footsteps as usual.


user-pic

Oh please!

Please please please, Republicans!

Make John Yoo the point man on your anti-Sotomayor campaign.

user-pic

" a place where cases are decided by a faithful application of the Constitution, not personal politics"

Yea like writing memos supporting criminals for political reasons is o.k. !!!

Yoo Suk

user-pic

Every judge makes her or his decisions based on their politics and temperament.

But white males, being the default group, are allowed to pretend that they are immune from those considerations, are allowed to pretend they--alone!--can decide based on the law, exclusively.

The greatest privilege enjoyed by the privileged it the privilige of pretending they aren't privileged...

user-pic

Absolutely nailed it.

White males are the only people without gender or race.

user-pic

And I guess Yoo identifies with them. Stockholm Syndrome?

user-pic

This guy is so repulsive in every way that it probably serves progressive's interests (not to speak of the interests of justice, human rights and the rule of law) for him to be a mouthpiece for his neofascist point of view.

user-pic

For someone who was busy torturing the law so that harm could be done to politically incorrect individuals he is talking pretty loudly.

He should be ashamed.

user-pic

He should be, but there's absolutely no chance that he will be.

user-pic

When Yoo needs psychotherapy he does not need a Freudian, he needs a sigmoidoscopy, to find his brain.

user-pic

a judge has to vote according "to the rule of law", a judge should not be an "activist" judge.. these are all code words right-wingers use to express how they want a judge to vote.. a judge always follows "the rule of law" if they vote how right-wingers want them to vote, and they are always "activist" judges if they vote in ways right-wingers don't like.. I don't know who these backward-thinking bozos think they are kidding...

one would think that after the last election results the GOP would get the message that the voters of this country REJECTED THEIR B.S... and that the more they insult the nominee and spread falsehoods about her, the more they will get hurt.. but well, they seem to still be in denial anyway, about why they lost the election, about the damage idiots like Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney are doing to their party, etc...

Republicans will make lots of noises and drag out the nomination process so they can take advantage of the occasion to fleece their usual constituencies (religious fanatics, gun fanatics, etc..) That's ALL they will get out of this nomination (and maybe these GOP constituencies (is anybody still sending money to the GOP?) will finally realize that continuing to pour money down that rathole isn't exactly paying dividends for them.....;)

and this guy Yoo, who issued a legal opinion saying it's ok for the U.S. to TORTURE, has the guts to say anything at all here??? PLEASE... that man should hang his head in shame...

user-pic

Is that your kitty? I love that kitty!!

user-pic

U of California pays this man to be a law professor, a person who as "eds" has pointed out above cannot even edit his own material to make a point. His analysis of Sotomayor includes nothing on her rulings, but only a personal attack on her race. He cites nothing to back up his assumption. My Law School Professors would call this a knee jerk reaction. California has more problems than budgets and gay marriage, it has pretenders teaching in its law schools.

user-pic

[slowly placing hand to brow].....W.T.F.

Here is my amicus brief:

"rosseforp" Yoo should be disbarred immediately for crimes against morality and for the sake of the Republic and its people.

Your double speak is not accepted here...

Then again, I am starting to think Obama baited these morons with the word "empathy" by expecting them to go off the deep end about legislative judges etc....


user-pic

citizenship and exile them. John Yoo and his value system are NOT American.

user-pic

that

user-pic

[fly away computer problem!]

that should have read:

Too bad one cannot be stripped of citizenship and exiled. John Yoo and his value system are NOT American. Fascist legal thinking.

user-pic

Few judges have it

But they do have *a little room off the courtroom that locks from the outside, and a bailiff with a gun to make sure that your contemptuous ass goes in with a minimum of fuss...

This is one reason why so few judges feel the need for it.

*My father to a judge who annoyed him: "Your Honor, one hundred dollars does not begin to measure my contempt for this court."

He got to see the room.

user-pic

What a pompous jerk. Hope they're measure a jail cell for him.

user-pic

". . . measuring a jail cell for him."

user-pic

Q: "If the president deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?"

John Yoo: "No treaty."

Q: "Also no law by Congress -- that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo..."

John Yoo: "I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that."

user-pic

now you all understand the folly of obama not prosecuting these bush criminals.

do you really want these people spending the next 8 years lying and controlling the debate?

or should they ALL be fighting to stay out of jail??

user-pic

Fawk Yoo, Yoo fawken fawk.

user-pic

My first reaction was "Pot, meet kettle." But, then, I thought: "Well, that's rather unfair to the kettle, isn't it?"

user-pic

"In other breaking news, John Yoo has absolutely no sense of self-awareness."

Best line I've read in a long time.

Hey screaminmeme, love that King Crimson av you've got going.

user-pic

Thankee. Seemed an appropriate av for my handle . . . hope Tripp et al. don't mind. On topic: Is it even possible that Mr. Yoo does not fathom the perverse irony of his comments? There is no way in hell that his comments don't make their way into "Countdown"'s "WTF Moment", The Daily Show, or both. You simply cannot make this stuff up!

user-pic
Conservatives should defend the Supreme Court as a place where cases are decided by a faithful application of the Constitution

This from the man who created the rationale that it's ok for the US Government to torture, despite the fact that courts are ruling against his absurd "interpretation" of the Constitution at every turn.

user-pic

Conservatives are absolute hypocrites:
Conservative Judicial Empathy? You Betcha!

user-pic

Oregon Activist is laughing too hard to comment.

user-pic

As a voter she should cast her vote however she wants, we do have a private ballot after all. But it would be nice if as a jurist she does a good job interpreting the constitution. "Faithful application of the constitution" is a ridiculous phrase because interpreting the constitution is the SC's job and any interpretation they reach is de facto constitutional. They don't just make decisions based on nothing but intuition (maybe bush v gore :(), they do try to follow precedent set by prior SC decisions.

It's too bad John Yoo doesn't even know the proper terminology for justices but it's no surprise, he is a bit of an idiot.

user-pic

The torture guy (with absolutely zero credibility) seriously needs to STFU before someone notices him and hauls him off to The Hague

user-pic

Yoo criticized her "on the grounds that she could decide cases on the basis of outcomes rather than the law."

This is rich, rich I tell you.

The torture memos, which ignored statutory law as well as prior opinions is the PERFECT example of advice on the basis of outcome rather than the law.

Am I surprised a ReThug could be so hypocritical?

Not exactly.

user-pic

Who cares what the war criminal thinks. He should be praying for forgiveness for the deaths on his head.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

Josh
Marshall

Bio

Matt
Cooper

Bio

Eric
Kleefeld

Bio


Latest Videos




Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address