Thickening and the Obama Administration

Gerard Magliocca

Gerard N. Magliocca is the Samuel R. Rosen Professor at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. Professor Magliocca is the author of three books and over twenty articles on constitutional law and intellectual property. He received his undergraduate degree from Stanford, his law degree from Yale, and joined the faculty after two years as an attorney at Covington and Burling and one year as a law clerk for Judge Guido Calabresi on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Professor Magliocca has received the Best New Professor Award and the Black Cane (Most Outstanding Professor) from the student body, and in 2008 held the Fulbright-Dow Distinguished Research Chair of the Roosevelt Study Center in Middelburg, The Netherlands. He was elected to the American Law Institute (ALI) in 2013.

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. I think the closer we move to socialized health care, the better.

  2. A.J. Sutter says:

    Could there be another reason for Obama’s troubles: what Pierre Rosanvallon calls an “ideology of transparency [that] has emerged as the new democratic ideal, in place of the old, which was to create through politics a society in which people could live together in a shared world” [A. Goldhammer translation; [original is more concise.] This, and the recent rise in importance of other forms of what Rosanvallon calls “counter-democracy” (including increased oversight of those in power by the electorate; the “sovereignty of prevention;” and the various forms of judging exercised by the electorate (esp. “de-selection”/non-re-election of representatives)) make Congresspeople even more solicitous of their own rear ends than they were during the pre-Internet/Fox News days. Maybe there’s some overlap between these ideas and Skowronek’s notions of institutions and interest groups. But while Rosanvallon’s observations might not explain your Jefferson and Jackson examples, nothing says there has to be one consistent explanation of blocked presidencies throughout history.

  3. Or it might mean nothing more than that he was lying about what he meant to accomplish. Given how many promises he unambiguously holds the power to deliver on without the aid of anybody else, (Such as posting laws sent to him for five days before signing them; Who could possibly force him to violate THAT promise?) and yet has violated, this theory has a certain attraction.