![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
amari_zAfter a crazy few weeks, things have ground to a screeching halt. Since I can't think about it without ranting (and I've already ranted plenty--probably to people I shouldn't) , I won't say much beyond the hardly surprising observation that there are crazy, petty, inconsiderate people out there, and dealing with them will make you tear your hair out and, if you're not careful, a crazy, petty inconsiderate person yourself. After weeks of killing-pace work, apparently our presence is not presently required, though no one has bothered to inform of us of that fact to our face, not even the person we directly work for. Such an ass.
Anyway on to more frivolous but happier things. Because of this unexpected respite, I've had time for some frivolous, happier things, including leaving work early to catch Spider-Man yesterday (had a really good time) and watching lots of anime. I finally watched all the released eps of Kyou Kara Maou! which has to be one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time. I absolutely love it. It's crazy. I've also, rather strangely, been watching the old anime God Mars (or whatever it's real name is). It's formulaic with stock characters and robots which go through their transformation predictably ever episode, but oddly I keep watching it. It must be nostalgia. I have also watched the first 3 disks of Figure 17. It's surprisingly good and rather endearing. I could see it getting kinda boring though, if they don't move it forward with both Tsubasa's character development and with the plot.
Also, Just finished reading Seabiscuit, which I couldn't put down. It's a lot different than the movie, but for once I think it might be a situation where the book and the movie both stand on their own--I don't think I would have been disappointed by the movie if I'd read the book first, which is usually the case. I also read Shoots, Eats and Leaves, which is a great little grammar book. I don't think I'll ever pick it up as a reference (and some of the rules are definitely inapplicable to American writing), but it's a fun read. I still have to go back and take a look at her section on colons, though. I don't think I've ever used colons in one of the ways she describes.
I didn't waste all my time on entertainment, though. I spent most of yesterday afternoon reading through the Supreme Court's recent decisions. I don't claim to be an expert in these areas of law, but--
While I don't think the Court went far enough in Hamdi (detention of the U.S. Citizen as an "enemy combatant") or Rasul (detention of non-citizens at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba) at least I don't have to flee to Canada right away (we'll see what happens in November). Shockingly, for the first time I can remember, I actually agreed (almost) with Scalia. His opinion in Hamdi (joined by Stevens) was far closer to what I'd have liked to have had the majority hold--that in the absence of a congressional suspension of habeas corpus, the person detained has to be charged with a crime.
Scalia (the world is ending soon) hit it on the head when he wrote: "if civil rights are to be curtailed during wartime, it must be done openly and democratically, as the constitution requires, rather than by silent erosion through an opinion of this court." While the majority's holding is hardly surprising, it's leaving way too much leeway for the administration to proceed with these indefinite detentions so long as it can make some unspecified, undefined showing of government interest. The district courts are in for so much fun with this.
Watching this administration in action--more secretive, arrogant, deceitful, corrupt and utterly terrifying than any in my lifetime--it seems like a good time to dig out the Federalist Papers and remember just why we have a system of checks and balances. The Framers, among other things, were afraid of what a powerful, despotic executive could do to the people's rights. While it might have been easy to scoff at such sentiments a few years ago, given our oh so enlightened age and the entrenched nature of our rights, it is no longer something that can be dismissed as a matter of historical inquiry or as the concern of legal academics. Scalia quotes Hamilton from Federalist No. 8:
Anyway on to more frivolous but happier things. Because of this unexpected respite, I've had time for some frivolous, happier things, including leaving work early to catch Spider-Man yesterday (had a really good time) and watching lots of anime. I finally watched all the released eps of Kyou Kara Maou! which has to be one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time. I absolutely love it. It's crazy. I've also, rather strangely, been watching the old anime God Mars (or whatever it's real name is). It's formulaic with stock characters and robots which go through their transformation predictably ever episode, but oddly I keep watching it. It must be nostalgia. I have also watched the first 3 disks of Figure 17. It's surprisingly good and rather endearing. I could see it getting kinda boring though, if they don't move it forward with both Tsubasa's character development and with the plot.
Also, Just finished reading Seabiscuit, which I couldn't put down. It's a lot different than the movie, but for once I think it might be a situation where the book and the movie both stand on their own--I don't think I would have been disappointed by the movie if I'd read the book first, which is usually the case. I also read Shoots, Eats and Leaves, which is a great little grammar book. I don't think I'll ever pick it up as a reference (and some of the rules are definitely inapplicable to American writing), but it's a fun read. I still have to go back and take a look at her section on colons, though. I don't think I've ever used colons in one of the ways she describes.
I didn't waste all my time on entertainment, though. I spent most of yesterday afternoon reading through the Supreme Court's recent decisions. I don't claim to be an expert in these areas of law, but--
While I don't think the Court went far enough in Hamdi (detention of the U.S. Citizen as an "enemy combatant") or Rasul (detention of non-citizens at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba) at least I don't have to flee to Canada right away (we'll see what happens in November). Shockingly, for the first time I can remember, I actually agreed (almost) with Scalia. His opinion in Hamdi (joined by Stevens) was far closer to what I'd have liked to have had the majority hold--that in the absence of a congressional suspension of habeas corpus, the person detained has to be charged with a crime.
Scalia (the world is ending soon) hit it on the head when he wrote: "if civil rights are to be curtailed during wartime, it must be done openly and democratically, as the constitution requires, rather than by silent erosion through an opinion of this court." While the majority's holding is hardly surprising, it's leaving way too much leeway for the administration to proceed with these indefinite detentions so long as it can make some unspecified, undefined showing of government interest. The district courts are in for so much fun with this.
Watching this administration in action--more secretive, arrogant, deceitful, corrupt and utterly terrifying than any in my lifetime--it seems like a good time to dig out the Federalist Papers and remember just why we have a system of checks and balances. The Framers, among other things, were afraid of what a powerful, despotic executive could do to the people's rights. While it might have been easy to scoff at such sentiments a few years ago, given our oh so enlightened age and the entrenched nature of our rights, it is no longer something that can be dismissed as a matter of historical inquiry or as the concern of legal academics. Scalia quotes Hamilton from Federalist No. 8:
Safety from external danger is the most powerful director of national conduct. Even the ardent love of liberty will, after a time, give way to its dictates. The violent destruction of life and property incident to war; the continual effort and alarm attendant on a state of continual danger, will compel nations the most attached to liberty, to resort for repose and security to institutions which have a tendency to destroy their civil and political rights. To be more safe, they, at length, become willing to run the risk of being less free."How apt, and apparently how little the world changes. There's a reason after all why we're suppose to remember that Hitler rose to power after "terrorists" burned down the Reichstag.
