Talk:Theodore Olson

Untitled
Theodore ever remarry?

Why did he step down from his office in July 2004?

Why are the articles about his wife, Barbara Olsen, who died on Flight 77 on Sept. 11, 2001, linked to websites promoting conspiracy theories about the terrorist attacks? Surely there are less controversial news sources available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunshine1016 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Campaign contributions
I'm wondering about the encyclopedicness of the external link posted by anonymous user User:68.173.19.193 that links to a page showing the political contributions made by the subject of the article. The anon has evenhandedly posted the equivalent link on numerous biographical articles of persons both on the left and the right (e.g. Molly Ivins, Robert McNamara, Theodore Olson, Alex Kozinski, and several others), but despite saucing both the goose and the gander having these links in the articles doesn't seem right. Yes, it's factual; yes, it's verifiable; yes, it's interesting; but it still seems like a sly bit of POV, particularly for each individual article viewed in isolation. I haven't removed any of the links but I'm curious how others see this.

I've posted this question on the talk pages of all four articles mentioned above in hopes that a wider spectrum of editors will see and comment. -EDM 05:00, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, I had the same reaction. Maybe Molly Ivins is a red herring?

-ConDissenter 00:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Religious Faith

 * What is the religious faith of judge Theodore Olson?


 * I'm not sure, does anyone know if he's the same Theodore Olson who is an editor at Christianity Today?

This is not the same Olson. The man who is editor of christianity Topday is Ted Olsen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.73.162 (talk) 16:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

What did the investigation concern?
The article mentions that Olson was investigated by Morrison, but neither this page nor the Morrison v. Olson page describe for what crime or allegation he was being investigated. Would be helpful to know more.

http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/05/14/independent_counsel/index.html


 * https://web.archive.org/web/20030830064025/http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/05/14/independent_counsel/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chasmsar (talk • contribs) 18:57, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

BTW, his skeptical view of the Independent Counsel statute was later vindicated by events, and is now generally accepted by both major parties.

IIRC, a senior (liberal) judge testifying on behalf of then Judge Samuel Alito during his confirmation hearings even asserted that the outcome of Morrison, if decided today's Court, would have been much different.

Ruthfulbarbarity 09:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * That his skeptical view of the Independent Counsel statute was later vindicated by events, and is now generally accepted by both major parties, is debatable.

Other interesting things about Mr. Olson ?
Though it may be as contentious a nomination as was his Solicitor General nomination, Mr. Olson has a chance of being nominated as U.S. Attorney General to replace Alberto Gonzales. It was believed that Olson, teaming with Robert Bork, was helpful to Republicans in the Clinton impeachment, and to those backing the Paula Jones lawsuit against Pres. Clinton.

In the EPA affair, Olson initially prevailed in his challenge at the appeals level to the Independent Counsel law, with Justice Silberman's decision in Olson's favor. Olson later represented the all-male Virginia Military Institute in a suit brought against it by women who were denied admission.

Olson was at the University of California Berkeley in the 1960s, yet was the antithesis to the free-speech movement there. He was a member of the Federeralist Society (as were Bork and Kenneth Starr).

DonL 09:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's biased (although I assume whomever wrote it is a conservative), but it is just very strangely written, almost as if by a personal friend of Mr. Olson. It's just weird.Atthom

The last part implies that the Federalist Society doesn't support free speech, which is an odd (and untrue) assertion.--Gloriamarie (talk) 18:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

One more interesting question: Would it be worth mentioning his involvement in Citzens United v. FEC at this point? Or would it be better held off until the opinion is issued (assuming at this point an opinion is ever issued)? --Einhverfr (talk) 21:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Overemphasis on Perry
It was odd to have one sentence on Bush v. Gore, a high-profile case that defined Mr. Olson's career and the destiny of an entire nation, but a paragraph and a half on Perry v. Schwarzenegger, a case which has yet to even go to trial. I deleted the following paragraph, which was largely redundant. I've preserved it in case someone else wants to incorporate it into the remaining reference to Perry. In any case, it was in the wrong section: it's about his legal career, not about his political involvement. Viciouslies (talk) 12:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Involvement with Prop 8 and same-sex marriage rights
In 2009, Olson joined with David Boies, the attorney who had represented Gore in Bush v. Gore, to file a lawsuit in U.S. federal court to force federal recognition of same-sex marriage. "This is a federal question," Olson said. "This is about the rights of individuals to be treated equally and not be stigmatized." He said that he and Boies "wanted to be a symbol of the fact that this not a conservative or a liberal issue. We want to send a signal that this is an important constitutional issue involving equal rights for all Americans."
 * This is interesting. Olson has served on two vastly different sides of the political aisle: Solicitor General under Bush, but yet arguing against Prop 8.  Is there any information available about the reasons for this (apparent) switch?Bry9000 (talk) 21:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage - Why same-sex marriage is an American value. Text of Ted Olson’s Opening Statement in Prop. 8 Trial – As Prepared --Destinero (talk) 12:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Support for Park51 project
Would it be appropriate to mention Olson's support for the Park51 project (a.k.a. the "Ground Zero mosque")? On the one hand, it's notable because he's a major conservative figure, and most conservatives have lined up on the opposite side of this issue (and Olson's status as a 9/11 widower also makes it noteworthy); on the other hand, it was just a passing opinion given in an interview, and he hasn't had any involvement with the project. What would be best practice in a case like this? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 12:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Confusion
User:Therequiembellishere has insisted on strange edits. This last revert put a nowrap around a one-line field (if it fits, it fits; a CRLF won't save it), WP:OVERLINKs U.S. (common regions should not be linked), adds a spurious hanging spaces to death_date and death_place, and uses an WP:EASTEREGG that links UCB to its law school. Olson's undergraduate alma mater is UoP (a bare reference implies undergrad). He also graduated from Berkeley's Law School. Just stating UCB rather than UCB Law buries the graduate level and the law degree aspects; that does not serve the reader. To put it differently, at Harvard University, you graduate from Harvard College (undergrad), Harvard Law School, Harvard Medical School, Harvard Business School, Harvard Divinity School, .... Glrx (talk) 03:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)