Commentary Magazine


Contentions

He Thinks What??

Andy McCarthy and Ed Whelan held a blogger conference call today on the nomination of Harold Koh as legal adviser to the State Department. Whelan’s extensive writings on Koh can be found here. In short, McCarthy and Whelan argue based on voluminous review of Koh’s extensive writing, and specifically Koh’s self-described adherence to “transnationalism,” that Koh seeks to impose a radical view of American law and advocate its subservience to international law. What does this mean? Whelan explains that in this world view international law and norms “supplant ordinary processes of representative democracy.” The Supreme Court, in Koh’s view, should import international law to erode what Koh disparages as America’s “distinctive rights culture” (this is a bad thing in Koh’s view). In Koh’s vision the Supreme Court should invent new rights and apply treaties — even those not ratified by the U.S. — to override domestic law. While this may seem remarkable, even unbelievable, in its extremism, Koh’s ample scholarship clearly supports this summary.

I asked why then there hasn’t been more opposition within the Senate, where his nomination was passed from a committee by a 12 to 5 vote with Sen. Richard Lugar voting “yes.” (Further information on Koh’s views and the progress of his nomination can be seen here.) The answer: in some sense Koh has benefited by the notion that he “can’t possibly be this bad” — yet his views are indeed nearly unprecedented for any potential high-ranking U.S. official. McCarthy suggested that moderate Democrats reconsider whether Koh’s extremism is really a philosophy with which they want to identify. After all, as McCarthy explained, Koh views the Iraq war as a violation of international law because it was not authorized by the UN, leaving the inevitable conclusion that those who nevertheless voted to authorize use of U.S. forces are guilty of war crimes.

It is worth noting that if we have learned anything in the last month, it is that Obama seems to have no stomach for fights in defense of the extreme Left’s agenda. If presented with robust opposition, would he go to the mat for this nominee? I think that’s highly doubtful.


Join the discussion…

Are you a subscriber? Log in to comment »

Not a subscriber? Join the discussion today, subscribe to Commentary »





Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.