January 5, 2009
THE REAL DEAL AT JUSTICE.... The transition office announced this morning Barack Obama's choices for some of the top positions in the Justice Department.
Today, President-elect Barack Obama announced that he intends to nominate the following individuals for key posts at the United States Department of Justice: David Ogden, Deputy Attorney General; Elena Kagan, Solicitor General; Tom Perrelli, Associate Attorney General; and Dawn Johnsen, Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel.
President-elect Obama said, "These individuals bring the integrity, depth of experience and tenacity that the Department of Justice demands in these uncertain times. I have the fullest confidence that they will ensure that the Department of Justice once again fulfills its highest purpose: to uphold the Constitution and protect the American people."
The subtle message of Obama's quote is that the Justice Department has fallen short of fulfilling its highest purpose lately.
Regardless, there's a lot to like about this team, especially Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan as the Solicitor General, the first woman to earn the position. Ogden and Perrelli are also obviously very qualified for their respective posts.
Dawn Johnsen at the OLC is especially encouraging, and not just because she wrote a great piece for the Washington Monthly in 2002 on Bush's conservative judicial nominees.
As Tim Fernholz noted, Johnsen has also recently published pieces such as Faithfully Executing the Laws: Internal Legal Constraints on Executive Power and What's a President to Do? Interpreting the Constitution in the Wake of the Bush Administration's Abuses. "Given that OLC was a hotbed of torture-justifying and illegal-surveillance-allowing during the last administration, it's nice to see that the new boss has a different set of ideas," Fernholz added.
Damn straight. Johnsen has specifically blasted the "abuses" and "illegal practices" in the Bush Administration's torture policy, arguing, "In short, OLC must be prepared to say no to the President.... If the President desires only a rubberstamp, OLC will have to struggle mightily to provide an effective check on unlawful action. In addition to being prepared to say no, therefore, the assistant attorney general for OLC and other top Department of Justice officials must also be prepared to resign in the extraordinary event the President persists in acting unlawfully or demands that OLC legitimize unlawful activity."
And here's another great piece Johnsen had in April, responding to the release of John Yoo's torture memos: "I want to second Dahlia's frustration with those who don't see the newly released Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) torture memo as a big deal. Where is the outrage, the public outcry?! The shockingly flawed content of this memo, the deficient processes that led to its issuance, the horrific acts it encouraged, the fact that it was kept secret for years and that the Bush administration continues to withhold other memos like it -- all demand our outrage."
And now Johnsen is going to head the OLC. This is most definitely change I can believe in.
—Steve Benen 1:25 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (11)
Kagen is clearly being set up as a Supreme Court pick, which is fine by me (although my preference would be a 25 yr old fanatical socialist who could spend the next 70 years undoing everything Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito ever touched).
Posted by: zeitgeist on January 5, 2009 at 1:22 PM | PERMALINK
Speaking of Yoo why is it that he and Bolton are able to get their op-eds published by major newspapers? It is it a Murdock thing?
You would think that Yoo would be trying to keep his head down. After all he might be invited to take part in proceedings at the Hague.
Posted by: Ron Byers on January 5, 2009 at 1:28 PM | PERMALINK
Yoo writes op-ed's for the Wall Street Journal and Johnsen writes one for Wash Monthly. Sweet. That's change I can believe in.
Meanwhile, Republicans must be getting a bit nervous with this lineup.
Posted by: Danp on January 5, 2009 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK
well, these appointments ought to send a chilling message to those in the CIA who want to keep torturing.
Posted by: redwood on January 5, 2009 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK
The subtle message of Obama's quote [...] -- Steve Benen
Subtle??? Have you gone all "understating Brit" on us, Benen? It's as "subtle" as poking someone in the eye with a well-sharpened stick. For the perfect choice of words and giving them weight "just so" through their placement in the sentence, the Man is a model to every writer... :)
Just think of the phrase: "integrity, depth of experience and tenacity". Bush's DoJ had only the third one of those characteristics and Obama gives it the least weight, placing the two, which were most glaringly lacking ahead of it. Love it!
Posted by: exlibra on January 5, 2009 at 1:41 PM | PERMALINK
Blame spineless Democrats and the Republican enablers of Constitutional desecration.
Legacies of Bush and Ton DeLay. Loyalty over principle.
Lack of outrage by those in a position to act on it tends to create the general ennui of the populace we've witnessed. Cries for action were ignored. Such a pity there were only two realistic choices of party at the polls.
Hopefully the one I chose will prove worthy of my vote come February. Multiple people need jail time before I can manage faith again.
Posted by: toowearyforoutrage on January 5, 2009 at 1:45 PM | PERMALINK
Obama's picking a lot of good people. It will make up some for the less than progressive picks in some areas. That big tax cut of his, even if it be middle-class oriented: I think it's going to create too much debt unless offset, as it should be, with a substantial gas tax now that oil is low and we can take advantage to really move to other sources.
Posted by: Neil B ☺ on January 5, 2009 at 1:48 PM | PERMALINK
MSNBC is reporting that Obama has picked Leon Panetta for CIA.
Posted by: Danp on January 5, 2009 at 2:27 PM | PERMALINK
I have been a bad hand-wringer worrying about Obama's prepensity to compromise with the right wingers, and his voting history in the Senate. This is the first really positive, important action I feel comforted by in the new administration. It appears we will be returning to the rule of law. As someone who originally thought Dodd was the hope for a positive future, I say, "Hurrah!"
Posted by: CANDIDEINNC on January 5, 2009 at 2:44 PM | PERMALINK
For what it is worth: John Yoo remains on the faculty of Boalt Law School at UC Berkeley where he teaches -- it takes one's breath away -- Constitutional Law. As an alumna, I have written to the Chancellor and the Dean of the Law School to protest, resigned my lifetime membership in the alumni club, and told any and all Cal-connected solicitations for donations or subscriptions to peddle their appeals elsewhere (and why). The Law School dean recently sent me a report on US torture policy that two of its professors put together; "Guantanamo and Its Aftermath." Surprise: they think it's terrible and recommend that a commission look into the problem. This is, uh, not what I had in mind: prosecution and if found guilty jail is what I had in mind for those in the Bush "government" who authorized torture: it is against the law and it looks like they broke the law; officials need to know they are not above the law, that there really are consequences. Like jail, which is where we put people we believe harm society. If you are a CA taxpayer or a UC alum, you can voice your disapproval. The dean is Christopher Edley, Jr., at UC Berkeley School of Law, 215 Boatl Hall #7200, BErekely, CA 94720-7200; edley@law.berkeley.edu, Fax 1-510-642-9893. It is my general feeling that if Yoo cannot be tossed out because of tenure, he certainly can be stripped of: classes, teaching assistants, office, parking space, key to the men's room if there is one. Sophistry that enables torture -- a vicious, deeply dangerous event for the people tortured, ruinous to the humanity of the torturer, and devastating to the integrity, honor and self respect of the country that sponsors it -- does not deserve a the support of civilized society, and that includes a position at a public institution. Not even Berkeley, which I have truly loved in my time.
Posted by: sf on January 5, 2009 at 5:04 PM | PERMALINK
Kagan is a great pick for Solicitor General? Really? I like her very much, but generally it would be nice if the person responsible for arguing the official position of the United States before the Supreme Court actually had some experience, any experience, arguing appellate or trial cases before any court. Kagan does not have such experience that I can find evidence of. None. Kagan would be fine in some capacity, I respect her quite a bit, but she is wholly unfit for this job.
Posted by: bmaz on January 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM | PERMALINK