Robert's Stochastic thoughts
Asymptotically we'll all be dead
HOME
Feed
e-mail me
Angry Bear
Brad De Long's Semi Daily Journal
no more mister nice blog
Atrios
Mark Thoma
Matthew Yglesias
Michael Froomkin
Jim Henley
Glenn Greenwald
A Fistful of Euros
Benen and Hilzoy
Norwegianity
Jon Swift
my brother in law
formerly meta&meta
I Hans
Sour Grapes
fafblog:glofish central
voracious rationalist
archives
7/1/02 - 8/1/02
10/1/02 - 11/1/02
12/1/02 - 1/1/03
1/1/03 - 2/1/03
3/1/03 - 4/1/03
4/1/03 - 5/1/03
5/1/03 - 6/1/03
6/1/03 - 7/1/03
9/1/03 - 10/1/03
10/1/03 - 11/1/03
11/1/03 - 12/1/03
12/1/03 - 1/1/04
1/1/04 - 2/1/04
2/1/04 - 3/1/04
3/1/04 - 4/1/04
4/1/04 - 5/1/04
5/1/04 - 6/1/04
6/1/04 - 7/1/04
7/1/04 - 8/1/04
8/1/04 - 9/1/04
9/1/04 - 10/1/04
10/1/04 - 11/1/04
11/1/04 - 12/1/04
12/1/04 - 1/1/05
1/1/05 - 2/1/05
2/1/05 - 3/1/05
3/1/05 - 4/1/05
4/1/05 - 5/1/05
5/1/05 - 6/1/05
6/1/05 - 7/1/05
7/1/05 - 8/1/05
8/1/05 - 9/1/05
9/1/05 - 10/1/05
10/1/05 - 11/1/05
11/1/05 - 12/1/05
12/1/05 - 1/1/06
1/1/06 - 2/1/06
2/1/06 - 3/1/06
3/1/06 - 4/1/06
4/1/06 - 5/1/06
5/1/06 - 6/1/06
6/1/06 - 7/1/06
7/1/06 - 8/1/06
8/1/06 - 9/1/06
9/1/06 - 10/1/06
10/1/06 - 11/1/06
11/1/06 - 12/1/06
12/1/06 - 1/1/07
1/1/07 - 2/1/07
2/1/07 - 3/1/07
3/1/07 - 4/1/07
4/1/07 - 5/1/07
5/1/07 - 6/1/07
6/1/07 - 7/1/07
7/1/07 - 8/1/07
8/1/07 - 9/1/07
9/1/07 - 10/1/07
10/1/07 - 11/1/07
11/1/07 - 12/1/07
12/1/07 - 1/1/08
1/1/08 - 2/1/08
2/1/08 - 3/1/08
3/1/08 - 4/1/08
4/1/08 - 5/1/08
5/1/08 - 6/1/08
6/1/08 - 7/1/08
7/1/08 - 8/1/08
8/1/08 - 9/1/08
9/1/08 - 10/1/08
10/1/08 - 11/1/08
11/1/08 - 12/1/08
12/1/08 - 1/1/09
1/1/09 - 2/1/09
2/1/09 - 3/1/09
3/1/09 - 4/1/09
4/1/09 - 5/1/09
5/1/09 - 6/1/09
6/1/09 - 7/1/09
7/1/09 - 8/1/09
8/1/09 - 9/1/09
9/1/09 - 10/1/09
10/1/09 - 11/1/09
11/1/09 - 12/1/09
12/1/09 - 1/1/10
1/1/10 - 2/1/10
2/1/10 - 3/1/10
3/1/10 - 4/1/10
4/1/10 - 5/1/10
5/1/10 - 6/1/10
6/1/10 - 7/1/10
7/1/10 - 8/1/10
8/1/10 - 9/1/10
9/1/10 - 10/1/10
10/1/10 - 11/1/10
11/1/10 - 12/1/10
12/1/10 - 1/1/11
1/1/11 - 2/1/11
2/1/11 - 3/1/11
3/1/11 - 4/1/11
4/1/11 - 5/1/11
5/1/11 - 6/1/11
6/1/11 - 7/1/11
7/1/11 - 8/1/11
8/1/11 - 9/1/11
9/1/11 - 10/1/11
10/1/11 - 11/1/11
11/1/11 - 12/1/11
12/1/11 - 1/1/12
1/1/12 - 2/1/12
2/1/12 - 3/1/12
3/1/12 - 4/1/12
4/1/12 - 5/1/12
5/1/12 - 6/1/12
6/1/12 - 7/1/12
7/1/12 - 8/1/12
8/1/12 - 9/1/12
9/1/12 - 10/1/12
10/1/12 - 11/1/12
11/1/12 - 12/1/12
12/1/12 - 1/1/13
1/1/13 - 2/1/13
2/1/13 - 3/1/13
3/1/13 - 4/1/13
4/1/13 - 5/1/13
5/1/13 - 6/1/13
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Hypothetical Questions
Following in Roberts' footsteps Alito is refusing to answer questions whose answers might prejudge cases he might hear. I think there is a simple way to get around this frustrating excuse for obfuscation.
Alito claims that he will keep an open mind about Roe vs Wade. As such he should have no trouble answering the following question.
" What considerations would tend to lead you to uphold Roe vs Wade and What considerations would tend to lead you to overturn Roe vs Wade ?"
If one of the lists is empty, Alito has been lying about the alleged open ness of his mind.
Respect for precedent will, of course, be his only argument for upholding. His argument against will either show he intends to reverse or enrage the right. I don't see how saying you see arguments on each side of a question can possibly prejudge a decision. I don't think he can dodge that one.
I would also really really like to ask him how he can possibly accept Griswold vs Connecticut and argue that Roe vs Wade constitutes judicial activism. Actually I would like to know what creadible arguments there are for this position. Quite frankly, I can't think of one (good thing I'm not a lawyer eh?).
Comments:
Post a Comment
