Why Roberts Should Observe the Omerta

Sure, I’d like to know what makes John Roberts tick, but if I were him, I wouldn’t say a darn thing during the Senate hearings. While in an ideal world we would be able to have an intelligent discussion about a nominee’s judicial views, I don’t think it is possible to have such a discussion in today’s media. Legal reasoning involves nuance–a judge may take a position that sounds absurd on the surface, but upon further review of the legal grounds, it makes sense. A good judge may rule to uphold a law he abhors, or strike down a law he supports. But all of this will get lost in headlines and sound bytes which are designed to strip away nuance. This is especially true when you have liberal groups that have raised millions of dollars to sabotoge any Bush nominee. Whatever Roberts says will be oversimplified and quoted completely out of context by these groups in an effort to embarrass him.

One thought on “Why Roberts Should Observe the Omerta”

  1. Exactly, look at how lefties are howling about Robert’s ruling in the case of the little girl arrested on the DC metro for eating a french fry. The irony is that his position in the case was essentially that if the residents of DC don’t like thier city’s public transit french fry policy they have every right to vote out the socialist buffoons who maintain the absurd bureaucracy that creates such mindless excesses of law enforcement.

Comments are closed.