‘Dawn Johnsen fatigue’

February 15, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Today's post is from IL reporter Rebecca Berfanger:

I just Googled an Indiana University Maurer School of Law – Bloomington professor for what seems like the thousandth time in at least a year. And I’m guessing I’m not the only one … in fact, far from it.

Pretty much ever since President Obama first suggested he would nominate professor Dawn Johnsen to head the Office of Legal Counsel in January 2009 before his inauguration, there have been what seem to be countless blog postings, news updates, and posts on Facebook fan pages. There have been letters on Web sites of legal organizations that support her and letters on pro-life organizations’ sites that oppose her. There even have been updates to Johnsen’s Wikipedia page.

With the information overload, I think I’m suffering from what I’ve dubbed “Dawn Johnsen fatigue.”

This is nothing against Johnsen. From what I’ve heard from other sources in the last year, she’s a perfectly nice, reasonable person. In fact, I think I’ve even talked to her for an article or two prior to her nomination, but it’s just been so long since I could talk to her that I can’t remember. Unlike most people I’ve written about, Johnsen can’t talk to me directly about the nomination or the process – at least not until it’s over.

Our most recent article about her was in the Jan. 20-Feb. 2, 2010, edition, “Nomination revitalized,” after the president re-nominated her at the beginning of this year due to procedural reasons. She is now waiting on another Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, which was first postponed a few weeks ago due to scheduling at the Senate, then because of snow, and now because of the Senate’s weeklong recess.

Meanwhile, for the last year I’ve been receiving e-mail updates from my coworkers, Johnsen’s co-workers, and some in the know about her pending nomination.

Even when the law school announces she’ll be teaching a class, it makes the news. I don’t know why that’s such a big deal, considering that is her job – at least for now. It’s also my understanding from talking with others at the law school that her classes have been scheduled in a way that if she’s ever confirmed she will be able to start her job in Washington, D.C., as seamlessly as possible.

But every time there’s an update, it’s one more story I weed through in my Googling efforts to figure out what’s going on. While I wait, she waits. I can only imagine how much she’s been reading about herself as we’ve both been following the same story for approximately 13 months. Or maybe she’s not even following it anymore.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT