Talk:J. Michael Luttig

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

United States courts and judges

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Virginia: Albemarle County Low‑importance

	Virginia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albemarle County, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

Letter of Revelation, Recently J. Michael Luttig posited that Former President Trump is ineligible to become President in 2024 due to his age. He basis this assertion on a misinterpretation / inaccurate understanding of the passage in the Constitution which defines, for instance, the qualifications for the presidency of the United States. He brought up the fact that "the president must be 35 years of age." That is not a correct interpretation / understanding of the passage within the Constitution which is found in Article ll, section one "no person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." The intent of that passage with respect to age is indicating that a President must have attained the age of 35, which means that a President must be 35 years of age or older (i.e. having been at least 35 years of age, no younger, but puts no restriction on being older than 35). Judge Luttig's argument and assertion of facts is grossly wrong, without realistic basis and should be dismissed as such! For a Judge to display such an ignorance of our Constitution is disgraceful! S.Schuck — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:D000:1999:4063:F6F:793E:D979 (talk) 03:17, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:NOTFORUM Bremps... 16:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Letter of Application[edit]

Well, it seems Mr Luttig's recent ruling was meant as a clear sign to the president that he is made of stern SCJ material.

I'm apalled. Every fibre in a judge of a western democracy should give a wince of pain before he/she passes a ruling like Mr Luttig did today (9/10/05). Edit: However, it seems the president looked elsewhere to fill both vacancies.--Istabraq 18:46, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What ruling are you talking about? Either give a reference or provide more details. --Asbl 18:20, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to Jose PADILLA v. C. T. HANFT, U.S.N. Commander, Consolidated Naval Brig., No. 05-6396, decided September 9, 2005. Sorry for the delay.--Istabraq 01:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Religious Faith[edit]

What is the religious faith of Judge Michael Luttig?

a judges religion should not be considered. simply because judges are supposed to be non-biased and are supposed to leave their religious and personal beliefs out of any decision they make. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moogalishis (talk • contribs) 00:01, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous. This is about the person, not about an office. --Anvilaquarius (talk) 13:16, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Luttig's image[edit]

I'm sure Image:050623 luttig ex.jpg is depicting Judge Michael Luttig, but why it isn't used here? The image is now orphaned, which means it may be at the risk of being deleted.Wooyi 19:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why it shouldn't be here. Pan Dan 19:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot-created subpage[edit]

A temporary subpage at User:Polbot/fjc/J. Michael Luttig was automatically created by a perl script, based on this article at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges. The subpage should either be merged into this article, or moved and disambiguated. Polbot (talk) 14:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on J. Michael Luttig. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080723151636/http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/08/22/luttig.profile/ to http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/08/22/luttig.profile/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on J. Michael Luttig. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130516033125/http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/050719/19luttig.htm to https://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/050719/19luttig.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Federalist Society[edit]

Why is this article in the category "Federalist Society members," when the term "Federalist Society" is mentioned nowhere in the text of the current version of this article? That doesn't seem very encyclopedic, does it? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 21:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is the "encyclopedia anyone can edit" -- if you're comfortable with the rules related to sourcing and verifiability, feel free to make corrections to articles, including deletion of unsupported categories. NapoliRoma (talk) 22:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive references[edit]

References 36-42 7 of them, are all to fact check articles regarding Pence's ability to overturn the 2020 election on January 6, 2021. They all were published by good quality sources, but surely (without my having read them all) they all say much the same thing. The words "Fact Check" appear in all seven headlines. This seems excessive, like trying to crack an egg with 7 sledgehammer blows: it just makes a mess. IMHO it suggests an editor trying to slip in a comment that, if included openly, would risk a NPOV citation. If I am right about that, it happens to be my pov too, but this is not the place or the way to advocate for it. Absent any disagreement, I will return and reduce the 7 to the best 2 or maybe 3. Dgndenver (talk) 11:29, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]