• But in here it's so delightful - thoughts on Obama and the weather
• Protectionism: Everybody stimulate yourself!
• I like the pictures
• Mandela, King, Gandhi... Blagojevich
• Shovels are so 1933
• The cutting edge is nipping at its own tail
• Funny Because It's True (yet again)
• Obligatory Gaza
• Being Reasonable--reaction from the Muslim family recently thrown off a flight by AirTrain
• Won't you be my neighbor?
• Snowzilla
• ZOMG! Radioactive coal sludge will kill us all! (updated)
• Quick points on the auto industry bailout
• Slow and Steady
• Foreign policy and international public opinion

• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005

« The Great One | Main | The "Air Enronization" of the MSM Continues »

John Roberts and the Death Penalty

According to the Economist,

John Paul Stevens, a Supreme Court justice, criticised the death penalty, saying a substantial number of sentences had been “imposed erroneously”. He insisted the issue should be prominent at next month's confirmation hearings for John Roberts, George Bush's nominee to the court.

I honestly don't know what to think of this. I don't recall ever hearing any of the nine sitting justices comment on a nominee in any manner. Not that there has been a lot of recent precedent for me to observe. And while I have read "A Court Divided: The Rehnquist Court and the Future of Constitutional Law", I am not exactly a SCOTUS scholar or historian by trade.

Does it strike you as odd that a sitting justice would propose a litmus test or comment at all on a nominee? Am I being naïve? Am I reading too much into this? WWSDO'CD?