Associate Justice David Souter has served the Court and the country well for nearly two decades. He has dedicated his life to public service, to the rule of law and to the Constitution.Amen.
Justice Souter’s retirement is also a reminder of the legacy a president leaves with his appointments. Justice Souter remained on the bench long after the president who appointed him left office. President Obama now has the opportunity to nominate someone worthy of his own historic legacy. The president can look to a broad array of legal talent to select a nominee who not only has an excellent record in the law, but also a respect for core constitutional values and a commitment to equal justice for all not just a few.
04 May 2009
Alliance for Justice weighs in on Supreme Court vacancy
On the news of U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter's retirement, the Alliance for Justice issued the following excellent statement:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Mary,
ReplyDeleteWhoever President Obama picks, it should be someone who understands the gravity of the appointment.
I'm conducting research on how American foreign policy affects popular support for terrorism. This research project (RP) involves a worldwide survey to measure popular support for terrorism. It is inspired by the overall abuse of power pursued by the George W. Bush administration precisely at a time of ever-increasing demand for international cooperation and diplomacy. This RP maintains that the Bush administration’s foreign policies of unilateralism, preemption, and military hegemony (commonly referred to as the Bush Doctrine) represent a radical break from traditional American foreign policy. It further asserts a correlation between popular support for terrorism and a strong dissatisfaction with the status quo as upheld by the global hegemonic power.
Even though the Bush administration is no longer in office, this correlation is still relevant today as, without a clearly articulated Obama doctrine as of yet, we have no indication that American foreign policy will change course anytime soon. More broadly, a correlation between oppressive American foreign policy in general and popular support for terrorism would be of great interest to international relations (IR) scholars of all theoretical backgrounds— as America is the global hegemon. And for this reason, American foreign policy has a tremendous impact on the rest of the world. It can be used to secure peace and prosperity in the world (and along with it American credibility and legitimacy), or it can give rise to anti-American coalitions, create inefficiency through a loss of international cooperation, and diminish what legitimacy America may still enjoy as the leader of the international community.
During the eight years of the George W. Bush administration, we witnessed the latter at unprecedented levels. With a new administration in the Oval Office, research of this nature can prove invaluable in championing a more benevolent and multilateral American foreign policy in the future. Finally, measuring popular support for terrorism will afford us the ability to construct a model that demonstrates the demographic composition of a society supportive of terrorism versus one that is not. This model, in turn, should provide a method of measuring and predicting 1) the potential for terrorism in any given society, 2) the direction that acts of terrorism tend to be moving in (e.g. westward, eastward, or remaining static), and 3) broad trends in the support for terrorism, such as whether popular support is increasing among moderates, Westerners, and so forth. The survey can be accessed at
http://www.johnmaszka.com/SURVEY.html
Please take a moment and fill out the survey. The long-term goal of this project is to facilitate a more diplomatic American foreign policy in the years ahead.
Thank you!
John Maszka