January 9, 2006
Department of supreme irony
The (paid-subscription) Wall Street Journal apparently doesn’t see any incongruity in reporting this…
Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito told senators Monday that good judges don’t have an agenda, don’t look for partisan outcomes and “always do what the law requires” as the Senate opened hearings on President Bush’s choice for the high court.
“A judge can’t have any agenda. A judge can’t have a preferred outcome in any particular case,” Judge Alito told the Judiciary Committee in a brief statement in which he made a distinction between judges and attorneys working for clients.
… Immediately followed by this
Judge Alito, a conservative jurist on the federal appeals court, would succeed Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who has been a decisive swing vote on abortion, affirmative action and death penalty cases.
Because if being “a conservative jurist” isn’t having an agenda, I’m not sure what is.
But given its smiley little portrait of “Sam” Alito, I suspect the Journal isn’t quite seeing things the way I do.
Posted by Stephen at 6:53 PM in Legal issues | Media | Politics | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.disinterestedparty.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/738
