Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | Next revisionBoth sides next revision |
| documents:answers:liberal-articlev-disinfo [2020/02/18 20:11] – Oliver Wolcott | documents:answers:liberal-articlev-disinfo [2020/02/18 20:21] – Oliver Wolcott |
|---|
| Somewhat later, Chief Justice Warren, whose judicial activism was one of the targets of the Council of State Governments, mimicked Black and Swindler by with the absurd declaration that its amendment drive "could soon destroy the foundations of the Constitution."((Caplan, p. 74.)) | Somewhat later, Chief Justice Warren, whose judicial activism was one of the targets of the Council of State Governments, mimicked Black and Swindler by with the absurd declaration that its amendment drive "could soon destroy the foundations of the Constitution."((Caplan, p. 74.)) |
| |
| When Senator Everett Dirksen (R.- Ill.) joined the fight for an amendment partially reversing the Warren Court's reapportionment cases, his liberal colleagues pushed back hard. Senators Joseph Tydings (D.-Md) and Robert Kennedy (D.-NY) followed Black's lead and advanced various "reasons" why Congress should disregard state legislative resolutions it did not care for. ((Caplan, pp. 75-76)) Senator William Proxmire (D.-Wis.) and the liberal New York Republican, Senator Jacob Javits pressed the claim that a convention would be uncontrollable.((Caplan, p. 76. Javits was liberal not just for a Republican, but (like some of his GOP colleagues at the time) liberal in an absolute sense. His voting record was regularly marked as above 80% by the left-of-center Americans for Democratic Action. | When Senator Everett Dirksen (R.- Ill.) joined the fight for an amendment partially reversing the Warren Court's reapportionment cases, his liberal colleagues pushed back hard. Senators Joseph Tydings (D.-Md) and Robert Kennedy (D.-NY) followed Black's lead and advanced various "reasons" why Congress should disregard state legislative resolutions it did not care for. ((Caplan, pp. 75-76)) Senator William Proxmire (D.-Wis.) and the liberal New York Republican, Senator Jacob Javits pressed the claim that a convention would be uncontrollable.((Caplan, p. 76. Javits was liberal not just for a Republican, but (like some of his GOP colleagues at the time) liberal in an absolute sense. His voting record was regularly marked as above 80% by the left-of-center Americans for Democratic Action.)) |
| |
| Kennedy's resistance was supplemented by other opinion leaders associated with the Kennedy clan. In 1967, Kennedy speech writer Theodore Sorensen wrote a Saturday Review article in which he repeated Black's "minority will control the process" argument. In congressional testimony the same year, Sorensen speculated that an Article V convention might "amend the Bill of Rights . . . limit free speech . . . reopen the wars between church and state . . . limit the Supreme Court's jurisdiction or the President's veto power or the congressional warmaking authority." ((Caplan, p. 147. See below for other comments by associates and allies of the Kennedy clan.)) | Kennedy's resistance was supplemented by other opinion leaders associated with the Kennedy clan. In 1967, Kennedy speech writer Theodore Sorensen wrote a Saturday Review article in which he repeated Black's "minority will control the process" argument. In congressional testimony the same year, Sorensen speculated that an Article V convention might "amend the Bill of Rights . . . limit free speech . . . reopen the wars between church and state . . . limit the Supreme Court's jurisdiction or the President's veto power or the congressional warmaking authority." ((Caplan, p. 147. See below for other comments by associates and allies of the Kennedy clan.)) |
