Immigration, Politics

Let's Rewatch Sally Yates Posterizing Ted Cruz

Ted Cruz walked in woefully unprepared. A beatdown ensued.

By  
on
Photo by Scott Olson/Getty

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty

Someone in Senator Ted Cruz’s office thought he was ready for this hearing. Cruz himself probably thought he was ready for this hearing.

Ted Cruz was not ready for this hearing.

Knowing that all eyes were going to be on this hearing, and that the back-and-forth today could very well impact the ongoing legal battle over Trump’s placebo for racists travel ban, you’d have thought Cruz would have put some effort into it beyond grabbing two or three sentences at random and declaring, “I’m good” like a bad high school extemper.

That’s how he ends up with a performance like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Owgk1TOYInE&t=0m28s

Here’s my rough recap, if you can’t watch the video right now:

Sponsored

Cruz: Are you familiar with this language?
Yates: Yes, and also with the more specific and later in time language that Congress seems to have passed to override that section.
Cruz: Let’s talk about something else. Let me quote you.
Yates: Yes, and that same memo that you apparently didn’t read past the first line said all this other stuff. I’m also not sure you understand the basic job of OLC…
Cruz: Um, let me cut you off for a final question — has this exact scenario ever come up before in American history?
Yates: No? Because that’s a stupid question.
American Spectator: Cruz wins!

The tweet that sums it up:

This is the fundamental problem with the brand of fundamentalist textualism that holds sway with a lot of the legal right-wing. Being able to hang your hat on any two or three words at random and wave it around like it’s the Eleventh Commandment has some political expediency when you want to challenge Obamacare for a typo in the middle of 900 pages, but it can get you into trouble if you begin to believe the hype. Because the hardcore devotees like Cruz don’t just use textualism, they live it. And this devotion to the idea that “text” is always plain and obvious instills in them the firm belief that any snippet, no matter how shoddy or how divorced from context, clear or implied, must be true. And that’s when they run off the ditch like this.

But put aside all the talk about competing philosophies of statutory interpretation, and this is all you need to know about that exchange:

Sponsored

UGA Law 1, Harvard 0.

HeadshotJoe Patrice is an editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.

Topics

, , , , ,