I’m not surprised a strong advocate for deregulation would be opposed by the critical left and wonder what they’ll dig up about this nominee. It is strange the government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity would find a Hindu woman “the most damaging and regressive” choice. Could it because she's not Lesbian, bisexual or transgender?Neomi Rao is the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is an office in OMB focused on regulatory review. Administrator Rao is a former professor of structural constitutional law, administrative law, and legislation and statutory interpretation at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University. Administrator Rao founded the Law School’s Center for the Study of the Administrative State and focused her scholarship on the political and constitutional accountability of administrative agencies and the role of Congress. Additionally, Administrator Rao’s comparative analysis of the use of dignity in constitutional law has been widely cited in the United States and abroad. She also served as a Member of the Administrative Conference of the United States and on the Governing Council of the ABA Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice.
Prior to joining the Law School, Administrator Rao served in all three branches of government. She served as Associate Counsel and Special Assistant to President George W. Bush. Administrator Rao also served as counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, where she was responsible for judicial nominations and constitutional law issues. In between government service, Administrator Rao practiced in the London office of Clifford Chance LLP, specializing in international law and commercial arbitration. After receiving a B.A. from Yale University and Juris Doctorate from the University of Chicago, Administrator Rao clerked for Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and for Justice Clarence Thomas on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In perhaps the best sign, Buzzfeed notes that liberals are not happy:
Criticism from liberal advocacy groups poured in after Trump announced Rao’s nomination, focusing on her record on deregulation.
“Rao has never seen a regulation she didn’t hate, and as a judge would dismantle 40 years of environmental and social progress,” Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “Her confirmation would be the most damaging and regressive yet by Trump after Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.” https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/...ao-to-replace-brett-kavanaugh-on-d-c-circuit/
You mention a perfectly valid reason liberals would oppose this person and then immediately decide it must be based on something entirely irrelevant? Ok buddy. Have fun.I’m not surprised a strong advocate for deregulation would be opposed by the critical left and wonder what they’ll dig up about this nominee. It is strange the government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity would find a Hindu woman “the most damaging and regressive” choice. Could it because she's not Lesbian, bisexual or transgender?
I'll oppose this nomination precisely because they advocate for deregulation.I’m not surprised a strong advocate for deregulation would be opposed by the critical left and wonder what they’ll dig up about this nominee. It is strange the government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity would find a Hindu woman “the most damaging and regressive” choice. Could it because she's not Lesbian, bisexual or transgender?
I'll oppose this nomination precisely because they advocate for deregulation.
Deregulation is generally bad, unless you're careful to preserve necessary protections and only remove unnecessary stuff.
Generally speaking.
Some regulations are necessary.So, she's apparently a fan of small government....and that is a mark against her? Hmm.....
You mention a perfectly valid reason liberals would oppose this person and then immediately decide it must be based on something entirely irrelevant? Ok buddy. Have fun.
If liberals don't want her, she must be the absolute best choice.
Some regulations are necessary.
When I hear "advocate for deregulation", that means to me that they're advocating cutting the regulations that protect us by restraining corporations.
I don't like that.
Understand that I think corporations would kill people if it was legal, did doing so bring profit to the corporation doing it.
And that they do so already through circumspect or indirect means, for the same reason.
Although they're always ready with a defense along the lines of "well we weren't SURE this would happen, it was just a possibility".
IMO corporations are not by any means sufficiently punished for ****ing up, and if this were a just world the USA would be littered with the corpses of many a corporation taken down by government investigation for the harm it caused the people said government is supposed to protect.
You mention a perfectly valid reason liberals would oppose this person and then immediately decide it must be based on something entirely irrelevant? Ok buddy. Have fun.
I’m not surprised a strong advocate for deregulation would be opposed by the critical left and wonder what they’ll dig up about this nominee. It is strange the government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity would find a Hindu woman “the most damaging and regressive” choice. Could it because she's not Lesbian, bisexual or transgender?
Some regulations are necessary. [snip]
I'll oppose this nomination precisely because they advocate for deregulation.
Deregulation is generally bad, unless you're careful to preserve necessary protections and only remove unnecessary stuff.
Generally speaking.
What about deregulating marriage? Do you oppose thst?
Of course. The question is which are necessary. Conservatives and libertarians think that most of them are not.
That was the first source of my news, and I thought it was ironic they quote this figure at something advocating "biological diversity" criticising the nomination of a Hindu woman.You mention a perfectly valid reason liberals would oppose this person and then immediately decide it must be based on something entirely irrelevant? Ok buddy. Have fun.
I thought Trump was a Xenophobe, what’s he celebrating Diwali for?The announcement came as a surprise to the attendees of a Diya lighting ceremony in the White House commemorating Diwali, the festival of lights celebrated by millions of Hindus, Sikhs and Jains around the world.
Indeed, and so far this is why the critical left rejects her. I’m fine with regulations, but excessive regulation is a real problem. When is regulation “excessive” is a matter of perspective, it relates to the number, difficulty and cost of compliance and whether it conflicts with other regulations as is often the case. The DC Circuit Court is a very good place to seat a judge with interest in deregulation because this is a court that deals with a lot of claims over excessive regulation. Neomi’s ideological inclination doesn’t really matter since liberal judges in the Court of Appeals are the overwhelming majority. The selection of a woman for this position is a positive and I expect it will facilitate confirmation, or at least make opposition to her more difficult (in the wake of this wave of newly elected female representatives).Her position at the White House agency tasked with rule-making makes Rao a notable ally of Trump at the center of one of his core campaign promises: gutting excessive regulations from the federal government. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/13/neomiraokavanaugh-seat-987653
Well that worked.......for men.Things might be easier in that arena if everyone devolved to the old Roman model. When neither State nor religion were involved and being married only meant you said you were.
Maybe Trump will nominate her for the SC in 3 or 4 yearsThat was the first source of my news, and I thought it was ironic they quote this figure at something advocating "biological diversity" criticising the nomination of a Hindu woman.
I thought Trump was a Xenophobe, what’s he celebrating Diwali for?
Indeed, and so far this is why the critical left rejects her. I’m fine with regulations, but excessive regulation is a real problem. When is regulation “excessive” is a matter of perspective, it relates to the number, difficulty and cost of compliance and whether it conflicts with other regulations as is often the case. The DC Circuit Court is a very good place to seat a judge with interest in deregulation because this is a court that deals with a lot of claims over excessive regulation. Neomi’s ideological inclination doesn’t really matter since liberal judges in the Court of Appeals are the overwhelming majority. The selection of a woman for this position is a positive and I expect it will facilitate confirmation, or at least make opposition to her more difficult (in the wake of this wave of newly elected female representatives).
Depends what you mean by deregulation in this case.What about deregulating marriage? Do you oppose thst?
I suppose my position is based on a distrust of how current corporations are structured.Of course. The question is which are necessary. Conservatives and libertarians think that most of them are not.
Then this judge shouldn't be advocating for deregulation.Judges are not supposed to determine whether something "protects us" or not. That is a politicians job. A judges job is to determine whether a law is Constitutional or not.
She advocated for de-regulation because this was her job (as director of OIRA) and because this is an area of her particular interest (as a scholar and author specialized in administrative procedure, government, law and bureaucracy). We don't know if she would be advocating for de-regulation as a judge, don't think judges should be "advocating" for anything.Then this judge shouldn't be advocating for deregulation.
Given the importance of the D.C. Circuit (and the lack of any home-state Senators to mollify) I would expect the Senate Judiciary Committee to act promptly on this nomination. I would also like to think that this will not be a particularly controversial nomination. Rao was confirmed to OIRA 54-41, with six Senators crossing the aisle to support her confirmation. While I have no doubt most of the Senate will vote on party lines, this is the sort of nomination that should be capable of attracting bipartisan support. https://reason.com/volokh/2018/11/13/neomi-rao-for-the-dc-circuit
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?