Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Paul Clement Court
New York Magazine ^ | March 18, 2012 | Jason Zengerle

Posted on 05/19/2012 2:46:40 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued

Clement’s career is cresting just as the momentous legal crusades of a radicalized Republican Party are reaching the appellate level. His ability to strip the politics out of a contentious argument, the goodwill he engenders from Democrats, and his chumminess with the justices�these are all qualities that would appear to be anachronistic in contemporary, hyperpartisan Washington. But the case of Paul Clement suggests that, at least in one corner of the capital, they are very much in demand.

Clement disputes this political interpretation. �Look, I get it, I hang out in this town, I understand how people are looking at this case.� We are talking about Obamacare one recent afternoon in his Washington, D.C., law office. �But if you really get down to the legal issue that’s at the heart of it, it’s not really a partisan issue.� Clement insists that his involvement in the case is simply a judicial and intellectual endeavor. �My job is to focus on the legal issues, and I think the legal issues here are fascinating. It’s constitutional law in the finest sense,� he says. �I think that’s part of what the Court tries to bring to these cases�to look at what the constitutional principle is and to tune out the politics of the day.� When I ask Clement if he’s comfortable serving, in effect, as the lawyer for the tea party, he demurs: �It’s not something I would identify with.�

At the age of 45, Clement, who has thinning brown hair and the faintest trace of a midwestern accent left over from his Wisconsin childhood, is already in the upper echelon of the Supreme Court bar. It’s an elite group of lawyers who, much like the justices they routinely argue cases before, conceive of themselves as being Olympian in their detachment from politics.

(Excerpt) Read more at nymag.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: abortion; clement; deathpanels; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; kenyanbornmuzzie; mediawingofthednc; obamacare; partisanmediashills; paulclement; scotus; swrdswllwngsdshw; zerocare

1 posted on 05/19/2012 2:46:46 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic; fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican; Impy; GOPsterinMA; randita; Sun; ...

If Obama is defeated for reelection and a Supreme Court justice retires, Wisconsin native Paul Clement is certain to be a top prospect. Even his adversaries grudgingly concede his command of the Constitution and he has made a good impression on the current members of the Supreme Court, particularly Anthony Kennedy.


2 posted on 05/19/2012 2:50:10 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (Obama and Company lied, the American economy died)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
"Clement’s career is cresting just as the momentous legal crusades of a radicalized Republican Party are reaching the appellate level."

No bias in this article, no sir.

3 posted on 05/19/2012 3:03:11 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (If you like lying Socialist dirtbags, you'll love Slick Willard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

I agree, but the cynic in me says Clement is the equivalent of Babe Ruth knocking soft toss out of the park. To be clear, I’m not trying to diminish Clement’s talents; but I think many non-lawyers could dismantle some of the cases he’s been given.

Regardless, Clement would be an outstanding addition to SCOTUS, and considering the next admin could put 3 maybe 4 justices on the court, that’s a huge consideration for anyone wavering on Romney.


4 posted on 05/19/2012 3:08:47 PM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird
that’s a huge consideration for anyone wavering on Romney.

Right. That's precisely why I voted for that bum loser, McCain. That was the ONLY reason I voted for him (plus, I like Sarah).

5 posted on 05/19/2012 3:14:35 PM PDT by Salvey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Salvey

Can we not mention McCain this close to the dinner hour?


6 posted on 05/19/2012 3:16:34 PM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Salvey

Dittos


7 posted on 05/19/2012 3:19:47 PM PDT by 2nd Bn, 11th Mar (The "p" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

What wasn’t said in the article is how awful the current solicitor general is. He has an uncanny ability to irritate justices, give poor arguments backed with worse logic, tell the court their business, reinterpret justice’s arguments in ways they did not intend, and erect straw men to attack.


8 posted on 05/19/2012 4:30:25 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
"Even his adversaries grudgingly concede his command of the Constitution . . ."

That's the last thing the liberals want. The original constitution is irrelevant to them.

9 posted on 05/19/2012 6:04:53 PM PDT by Neanderthal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks Clintonfatigued.
Clement's career is cresting just as the momentous legal crusades of a radicalized Republican Party are reaching the appellate level. His ability to strip the politics out of a contentious argument, the goodwill he engenders from Democrats, and his chumminess with the justices -- these are all qualities that would appear to be anachronistic in contemporary, hyperpartisan Washington.
Partisan Media Shills ping.


10 posted on 05/19/2012 8:04:11 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (FReepathon 2Q time -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued; Hunton Peck; Diana in Wisconsin; P from Sheb; Shady; DonkeyBonker; ...

Wisconsin: Cedarburg SCOTUS ping

FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list.


11 posted on 05/19/2012 9:28:45 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird
Regardless, Clement would be an outstanding addition to SCOTUS, and considering the next admin could put 3 maybe 4 justices on the court, that’s a huge consideration for anyone wavering on Romney.

Anyone who feels disappointed by Obama's choices in Sotomayor and Kagan, will be similarly disappointed in Romney's if he elected.

Expect a string of Souters, Kennedys, O'Connors, and, yes, Paul Clement.

If Nicholas Katzenbach hadn't died, R-Money might nominate him, too.

12 posted on 05/19/2012 10:40:36 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson