« Right Is Center. Right? | Main | Where They Were From. »

July 2, 2005

A Flair for the Dramatic, Maybe?

T
oday's NY Times contains the first wave of letter-to-the-editor reaction to Justice O'Connor's retirement. Among the letters is this one from Eleanor Wieschaus:
To the Editor:

I was making my way up Duffy's Hill between 103rd and 102nd Streets on Lexington Avenue when a familiar beep notified me that I had a new voice-mail message.

I held down the "1" button and listened as my roommate Martha's voice informed me of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's resignation.

I thought to myself, "The world is ending," and I still had half the hill and four flights of stairs to go.

Now I sit in my apartment, surrounded by boxes, one wall half-painted, feeling somewhat paralyzed.

And here I thought the results of the past election had killed the last of my emotional connection with politics.


Eleanor: it'll be OK. Now find yourself an apartment on the ground floor.

Posted by Eric at July 2, 2005 12:00 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.isthatlegal.org/cgi-bin/mt33/mt-tb.cgi/236.

Comments

Thanks Eric. It needed to be said. When I read about Nancy Pelosi's comments last week, I shuddered. She referenced congressional efforts to curb Kelo, stating "when the Supreme Court decides an issue, it's settled. It's like the voice of God."

More like the voice of 9 geriatric attorneys, I've always thought. I think the insane level of hostility to the Court comes from us giving up on the legislative process, and looking to the Court to do too much for us. It's just nine elderly lawyers, as near as I can tell.

Posted by: Al Maviva at July 2, 2005 10:07 PM

What do you think of Noah Feldman's proposal in the 7/3/05 NY Times Magazine, headlined as "a provocative proposal for redrawing the line between church and state"? I found it very disturbing. Seems to be saying that maybe the Establishment Clause isn't such a good idea?? A quote: "Atheists will doubless maintain that any public religion at all--like "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance--excludes them by endorsing the idea of religion generally. But this misses the point: it is an interpretive choice to feel excluded by other people's faiths, and the atheist, like any other dissenter from a majoritarian decision, can just as easily adhere to his own views while insisting on his full citizenship." I've never before heard discrimination referred to as "an interpretive choice to feel excluded."

Posted by: gail murrow at July 3, 2005 10:24 AM