The One-Sided Blog Battle Over Harold Koh
BY Nancy Scola | Friday, April 3 2009
There's controversy brewing around Barack Obama's pick for what's arguably the State Department's most important legal post. What's particular relevant for us here is how it's playing out almost completely within the realm of right-leaning political blogs. The nominee is Yale Law Dean Harold Koh, chosen to serve as legal counsel to Hillary Clinton's State Department. At issue: Koh's supposed comments regarding the possibility that Sharia law could be drawn on in U.S. court cases. The genesis of the pushback against the Koh pick was a letter from a New York lawyer republished on National Review Online's Phi Beta Cons blog in a post by Carol Iannone called "Yale Law Dean Goes Dhimi." (With Dhimi, sayeth Wikipedia, meaning the subjecting of non-Muslims to Islamic law.) In the letter, at attended at a Koh event reported that the dean made "at least one favorable reference" to Sharia. Any hint that foreign laws could provide a source of wisdom or a point of contrast in U.S. courts is anathema to many conservatives. So it wasn't all that surprising when that letter was picked up by former National Review associate editor Meghan Clyne. In a heated New York Post piece titled "Obama's Most Perilous Legal Pick" posited that Koh was ready to throw out a couple hundred years of U.S. jurisprudence in favor of Shariah.
Now the anti-Koh campaign is gaining much steam online, without much of a fight being put up by the left. Slate's Dahlia Lithwick surveys the uneven landscape surrounding the Koh fight: "13 pieces on far-right Web sites characterizing Koh as dangerous and anti-American; several Fox News stories, updated several times daily, one of which describes the anti-Koh screeds as 'burning up the Internet'; and a measly two blog posts defending Koh from these attacks."