Political Processes & Rhetoric – Page 91 – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Recusal as Censorship?

Post author:Richard M. Esenberg
Post published:June 10, 2009
Post category:Judges & Judicial Process Political Processes & Rhetoric U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s decision on Monday in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company is interesting for what it may portend and for the methodological dispute between the majority and the dissent.

You know (or I’ll tell you) the basic facts. Massey has an important case before the West Virginia Supreme Court – an appeal of a $ 50 million verdict against it and in favor of Caperton and others. Massey’s CEO makes independent expenditures in the amount of $3 million in support of candidate Brent Benjamin. Benjamin wins and so does Massey – by a 3-2 vote with now Justice Benjamin in the majority.

The Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 decision, that Benjamin’s failure to recuse himself violated Caperton’s due process rights. So what’s the problem?

Sotomayor, Obama, and Ideology

Post author:David R. Papke
Post published:May 29, 2009
Post category:Political Processes & Rhetoric

I am among what must be a million or so people who receive e-mail messages from President Obama. They come addressed to “David” and are signed “President Barack Obama.” The most recent concerned the Sotomayor nomination and included an earnest four-minute video in which the President offered his reasons for the nomination.

I found the video impressive for various reasons. The President of course comes across as photogenic, genuine, and articulate. My goodness, he did not muff a single word! He also is a superb ideologue. In discussing the Sotomayor nomination, he skillfully invokes the importance of hard work, the rags-to-riches myth, the notion of a neutral rule of law, and assorted other staples of the dominant ideology. The President also assures us that the nominee herself is not an ideologue. The disavowal of ideology might in itself be the video’s most ideological ploy.

Women at the Bargaining Table . . . and on the Way to the White House

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:May 27, 2009
Post category:Legal Scholarship Negotiation Political Processes & Rhetoric

Andrea Schneider has two fascinating new papers on SSRN. In different ways, both papers deal with what Andrea and her coauthers label the “double bind” facing women in leadership positions: “The incongruence of the core feminine stereotype with managerial effectiveness can result in women being perceived as competent but unlikable, or as likable but incompetent.” The first paper, “Negotiating Your Public Identity: Women’s Path to Power,” illustrates the two options using two female politicians with clearly established public images: Hillary Clinton’s persona illustrates “competent but unlikable,” while Sarah Palin’s exemplifies “likable but incompetent.” (As I suggested in an earlier post, some of the criticisms of Sonia Sotomayor as lacking “judicial temperament” may owe something, à la Hillary, to the “competent but unlikable” stereotype.)

Andrea and her coauthors offer a humorous, but also disheartening, review of media coverage from the 2008 election that typecast Clinton and Palin into their respective roles. They also discuss social scientific research suggesting that the double bind arises from deeply entrenched gender stereotypes. They conclude more hopefully, however, with suggested strategies for professional women to minimize the harmful effects of the double bind.

The second paper, “Women at the Bargaining Table: Pitfalls and Prospects,” presents some of these suggestions in more detail, with particular attention to the implications for teachers of negotiation.