comments powered by Disqus
More Comments:
Richard Henry Morgan - 7/5/2004
I'm actually amazed that a panel at Antioch would find anybody in favor of Justice Thomas' confirmation. It's good to have one's preconceptions challenged.
I'm neither a big fan of Thomas, nor a big critic, but he does seem to have one advantage over Scalia in that he doesn't have Scalia's volcanic temper nor occasional blindspots (religion and military schools -- Scalia attended a boys' military prep school in NY -- don't led it be said that personal experiences don't occasionally guide justices -- Blackmun had been chief counsel to the Mayo Clinic, and when you read his opinion in Roe v. Wade, there's a huge amount of medical history, and very little legal analysis).
Bush did not cover himself in glory when he proclaimed Thomas the most qualified person for the job. Neither did the ABA panel, some of whom proclaimed him unqualified. Politics abound.
Andrew Ackerman - 7/5/2004
Right... it's a web-only article, I think, and so Lexis Nexis hasn't indexed it. But I got it through Baude's own site. Thanks.
Ralph E. Luker - 7/5/2004
It's odd, Andrew. If I go to Will Baude's own link to it at Crescat Sententia, you can access the article without a subscription. If I try to access it from the link at Cliopatria, you can't.
Andrew Ackerman - 7/5/2004
Is that viewable without a TNR subscription?