Blog

I realize the topic of Obama’s czars has been exhausted Ad Nausuem, both from the political blogosphere, and the legal blogosphere, mainly at Volokh.

Pajamas TV has a hilarious video featuring Glenn Reynolds discussing the many Czars currently in the Obama adminstration.

Today, the USA Today ran a great story dealing with the Czars (H/T Heritage Morning Bell). A few choice quotes:

“In the Senate, Democrats, such as Robert Byrd of West Virginia, are questioning the constitutionality of the advisers the White House says it needs to coordinate policy and advise the president on issues from health care to the Middle East. Republicans, such as Susan Collins of Maine, are trying to curb funding for them.”

Limiting funding may be one way to skin the cat, but I have been wondering for some time now how these Czars fit in the Humphrey’s Executor and Morrison v. Olson line of cases. What exactly do these czars do (other than sign 9/11 Truther statements)? Although in many cases their qualifications for the job are inferior, would their fiat and power qualify them as principle officers? If so, would advice and consent be required?

I’ll likely dig into the legal issues at some later point, and maybe a law review article if I get around to it, but I just wanted to throw this out there for thoughts and comments.

For those of you who may not know me, I have an unhealthy hobby of collecting constitutions autographed by Judges, Professors, and other people I admire. One day I’ll post some pictures, but I have dozens. Thus, my next poll question.

At the Constitution in 2020 Conference, I’d like to bring home a souvenir.

Choice A. A signed copy of the actual book, the Constitution in 2020, as most of the authors will be in attendance.

Choice B. A pocket Federalist Society constitution signed by the authors of the Constitution in 2020.

I’m leaning to Choice B, as I think it would be pretty funny to have the Constitution of 1787 signed by the authors of the authors of the Constitution of 2020. And considering how the authors of the Constitution of 2020 treated the Constitution on their cover, I think it would be appropriate to get their John Hancocks right on it.

What say you?

[polldaddy poll=2063541]

The ACS is hosting a conference on the Constitution in 2020 from Friday, October 2 – Sunday, October 4 at Yale Law School. I will in attendance, and will liveblog each of the 8 panels throughout the weekend. I read the Constitution in 2020 a few months ago, and previously attended a panel held at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.

This conference will have some of the greatest legal minds alive today, and I’m really looking forward to what they have to say. Particularly, I am focusing on the Progressive vision of the Privileges or Immunities clause, especially in light of the Question Presented in McDonald v. Chicago. I am currently working on an article, approriately entitled Opening Pandora’s Box. The Privileges or Immunities Clause and the Constitution in 2020. I hope to glean some good insights for my writing from this conference.

Stay tuned to this blog for updates throughout the conference.