tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739125502680107097.post8165297737613542212..comments2023-12-20T03:53:19.857-05:00Comments on Jost on Justice: David Souter: A Principled Justice<b>Kenneth Jost</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/08130278447396616546noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739125502680107097.post-72086153428459753872016-02-05T07:52:00.396-05:002016-02-05T07:52:00.396-05:00This is very educational content and written well ...This is very educational content and written well for a change. It's nice to see that some people still understand how to write a quality post.! <br />obat aborsihttp://obataborsicytotec.info/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739125502680107097.post-27759141941896850462009-05-01T19:26:00.000-04:002009-05-01T19:26:00.000-04:00In response to the first comment, I think there's ...In response to the first comment, I think there's a significant distinction between a justice's vote on <EM>Roe</EM> and on <EM>Casey</EM>, so you can't really speak of a general "downside to Roe/Casey" as a group. In particular, it isn't clear to me that Souter would have actually voted in the majority on <EM>Roe</EM> were he on the court. His vote for <EM>Casey</EM> was based in large part on <Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15939949185232291652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5739125502680107097.post-34777105047029542412009-05-01T14:47:00.000-04:002009-05-01T14:47:00.000-04:00I find it ironic that you use Casey as your openin...I find it ironic that you use Casey as your opening and closing example of law over politics, or of "principled" and "accepted by the Nation." There's a lot I admire about Souter, and I have no doubt that he is, in his own mind and heart, sincere in his beliefs that (1) Casey was law, not politics, and (2) Bush v. Gore was politics, not law. But, without rehashing the entire Roe debate here, Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com