Monday, February 10, 2003
fuzzy math
Because I am in a grumpy mood today, I am self-helpfully doing things to make my mood worse. Such as reading "The Corner", the right-wing group blog. And such as sending them the following email, in response to this post.your post about the DC Circuit -- suggesting that the confirmation of Roberts and Estrada would simply return the DC Circuit to a 6-4 split -- is, among other things, just plain factually wrong. The "restore the status quo ante" spin would make sense as math -- and then be subject only to political debate over whether a 6-4 split constitutes an appropriate balance -- if and only if taking senior status meant not hearing cases anymore. But of course it doesn't mean that. As you can see by looking at the DC Circuit's website (www.cadc.uscourts.gov), Judges Silberman and Williams are still actively hearing cases. So confirming two more right-wing judges would make an 8-4 split. Confirming four more, which seems to be the plan now that the Clinton-era Republican talking point "they don't need a full complement of judges" has gone out the window, would mean a 10-4 split. This is a change, a tilt, by any truthful definition. Does Estrada's confirmation really require fuzzy math???? By the way, this was all started by a column by Chris Mooney (with which The Corner sought to take issue, in the post to which I responded); and Mooney has also done a good job on his blog of responding to Slate's sloppy assertion that the DC Circuit is no big deal.
posted by sam 1:08 PM
0 comments
0 Comments:
|
email: first name@last name dot net
|