Fatuosness in SCOTUS commentary.

This article by Michael Stone is fatuous and pusillanimous. It mentions a paper by the judge on the matter of capital punishment which sentence the judge opposes. Stone has clearly not read the paper in which she, the judge, clearly states the religious requirement for a Catholic judge who opposed the death penalty to recuse him or herself from the sentencing phase in a capital case. This is her moral opinion, and makes no pretense of stating a judicial opinion. The entire article is addressed to catholic judges who take seriously the church’s recent teaching regarding the immorality of the death penalty, which you might expect Mr. Stone to concur with.

If there are valid reasons to exclude this judge you won’t find them in Stone’s article. Articles like this serve only to promote a partisan opinion and probably harm a valid case against the judge if there is one.

Unfortunately, low caliber arguments will extend beyond opinion pieces and into the Senate process of advice and consent. In one way it will be a blessing if the good judge is not nominated. Listening to the sophomoric inquisitions of the grandstanding Senators is more than can be borne. 

%d bloggers like this: