A Supreme Court Justice Should Have a Better Memory
Shouldn't a Supreme Court justice have a better memory? It's possible to forget joining an organization. It's hard to forget being on its steering committee:
Roberts Listed in Federalist Society '97-98 Directory: By Charles Lane: Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. has repeatedly said that he has no memory of belonging to the Federalist Society, but his name appears in the influential, conservative legal organization's 1997-1998 leadership directory. Having served only two years on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit... Roberts has not amassed much of a public paper record.... [The] Federalist Society... keeps its membership rolls secret.... When news organizations have reported his membership in the society, he or others speaking on his behalf have sought corrections. Last week, the White House told news organizations that had reported his membership in the group that he had no memory of belonging....
Over the weekend, The Post obtained a copy of the Federalist Society Lawyers' Division Leadership Directory, 1997-1998. It lists Roberts, then a partner at the law firm Hogan & Hartson, as a member of the steering committee of the organization's Washington chapter and includes his firm's address and telephone number. Yesterday, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Roberts "has no recollection of being a member of the Federalist Society, or its steering committee."...
Then it gets really weird:
Federalist Society Executive Vice President Leonard A. Leo said that either he or another official of the organization recruited Roberts for the [steering] committee.... Membership in the sense of paying dues was not required as a condition of inclusion in a listing of the society's leadership, Leo said....
[T]he society is tolerant of those who come to its meetings or serve on committees without paying dues. "John Roberts probably realized pretty quickly he could take part in activities he wanted to" without being current on his dues, Whelan said.... In 2001, after he was nominated by President Bush for the seat he currently holds on the court of appeals, Roberts spoke to Post reporter James V. Grimaldi and asked him to correct an item Grimaldi had written that described Roberts as a member of the Federalist Society. In a subsequent column, Grimaldi wrote that Roberts "is not and never has been a member of the Federalist Society, as previous reported in this column."...
How much are Federalist Society membership fees? $100 per person a year? Would you want a cheepskate on the Supreme Court?
I don't understand this. I think of the Federalist Society as a bunch of right-wing goofballs, but I imagine that's a minority view. I thought they were largely viewed as a loud-and-proud mainstream organization. Why would an unabashed conservative like Roberts want to downplay his Federalist Society credentials? I'm genuinely surprised it's not the top item on his C.V.
Posted by: Laertes | July 25, 2005 at 08:39 AM
This sounds more like a do-nothing advisory committee -- he may have been invited to join in connection with a speaking engagement, and promptly forgotten about it. Otherwise, why wouldn't he have disclosed it in connection with his previous appointment -- there's nothing particularly embarrassing about it.
Posted by: Janon | July 25, 2005 at 08:47 AM
Is anybody starting a list of out-and-out lies by Roberts? Will he get to 100 before confirmation?
Posted by: Barry | July 25, 2005 at 09:14 AM
Janon it may well be just a tempest in a tea cup. But "steering committee" by definition is something different than "advisory committe". One putatively has you at the wheel, the other giving direction from the back seat.
But it is odd, because it was widely assumed that Roberts was a member anyway and nobody but a couple of whacked out conspiracy freaks like me and Laertes would have given a shit one way or another.
But hey it was not me that elevated lying about a consensual act that was ruled irrelevant to a civil case that was ruled without merit into justification for the Constitutional nuclear bomb of impeachment. Republicans made their bed, now they can lie (in both senses) in it.
Posted by: Bruce Webb | July 25, 2005 at 09:31 AM
Federalist Society dues are only $50 for a lawyer.
Posted by: Ole Possom | July 25, 2005 at 09:41 AM
I assumed that he wanted plausable deniability, and figured that he could deny being a member if he didn't pay the dues.
Posted by: Mike | July 25, 2005 at 10:48 AM
I don't remember being a member of the Federalist Society, either. Does that mean...oh dear, this is most disturbing.
Posted by: Susan | July 25, 2005 at 10:54 AM
Hell, I'm just to the right of Eugene V. Debs, and I may be listed somewhere as a member of the Federalist Society. That's the risk you take when you shamelessly cadge free drinks from the right side of the aisle. ("I don't know who this John Calhoun is, but if someone's hosting a cocktail party in his honor ...")
Posted by: alkali | July 25, 2005 at 11:46 AM
It is possible that the Federalist Society asks people to be on a do-nothing advisory committee, which they then call the "Steering Committee" in an attempt to fool people into thinking that all these smart, famous people who are just doing a cheap favor are in fact running the show...
Posted by: Brad DeLong | July 25, 2005 at 01:30 PM
But without asking for a $50 membership? In a society which is probably equivalent by now to the Association of GOP Lawyers?
I'm wondering now if this isn't the first visible sign of a pathological liar/BS artist.
Posted by: Barry | July 25, 2005 at 01:37 PM
Obviously the Federalist Society has, like the CIA, suddenly been over-run by zealous liberal who will stop at nothing to ruin GWB and his appointments. I for one, have been on to them for some time. The moment their website listed Barbara Boxer as the head of their Secret Police I knew where they were headed.
Posted by: WR Grace | July 25, 2005 at 01:40 PM
But $50?!?!? What kind of crappy organization is this? There doesn't seem to be anything exclusive at all....
That being said, what's obvious is that - whether on a committee or not - Roberts agrees with the creep the Federalist Society espouses. Why is he trying to distance himself from this?
And another obvious thing, to me anyway, is that he's in like Flynn, no matter the truth, no matter the lies. And if he's a closet Scalia or Thomas, then...sigh...Canada might welcome us.
Posted by: glenn | July 26, 2005 at 04:06 AM
It is possible that the Federalist Society asks people to be on a do-nothing advisory committee, which they then call the "Steering Committee" in an attempt to fool people into thinking that all these smart, famous people who are just doing a cheap favor are in fact running the show...
That is very typical for think tanks and lobby shops--they'll have a bunch of well-known figures on their 100-member "Board of Directors" who occasionally speak at meetings but have no other involvement with the organization. (Worked a summer in DC and still have friends in the think-tank/ policy institute world).
Posted by: SamChevre | July 26, 2005 at 02:34 PM