May 01, 2004

Justice Souter Attacked

by Chris Geidner

As noted at Atrios, Justice David Souter (my favorite!) was attacked and beaten -- but is fine -- while jogging last night. A court spokeswoman "could not characterize the nature or motivation for the attack only that several young men were involved." Howard, of course, has more here.

May 1, 2004 05:34 PM | TrackBack
Comments

Why is Justice Souter your favorite?

Posted by: Jennifer at May 2, 2004 11:23 AM

Because he's a night jogger.

I use to jog at night, but then again, it's was in Charlottesville where fear of attack was minimal unlike D.C.

Obviously these thugs weren't Republicans, otherwise they would have given Bush an empty seat on the bench.

Oooo, poor taste.

Posted by: Brian at May 2, 2004 03:56 PM

I use to jog at night, but then again, it's was in Charlottesville where fear of attack was minimal unlike D.C.

You're joking, right? What about the serial rapist who's been committing assaults since 1997 and is still at large? Now a psychic is offering to help find the guy.

Posted by: PG at May 3, 2004 08:03 AM

Souter was my favorite, too, particularly when I was highly interested in establishment clause jurisprudence. Since I've moved into other areas, I've found him a bit too soft for my tastes in some. That said, on the basis of his establishment clause opinions alone, he is still my second favorite.

(If anyone is curious, my favorite is now Breyer. His strength in administrative law, regulated industries, and antitrust, combined with often (though certainly not always) agreeing with him on other matters, makes him my top choice.)

Now that this thread has been taken over, it may be interesting for others to chime in with their top picks and reasons if there are any.

Posted by: Greg at May 3, 2004 02:44 PM

David Hackett Souter is my justice favorite because, well, honestly, we often agree.

One of the best examples was during the 2000 election. I was working at the newspaper then, and so I had read the safe-harbor provision. His questions during the first case were all right on-target with what I saw: Wasn't this an issue for Congress? And only later an issue for the courts?

(Now, keep in mind, I haven't read the Palm Beach case in a while and am in a post-finals haze . . . but I believe the preceding paragraph is fairly accurate.)

Anyway, the point being, I just find that Justice Souter most closely memorializes in his opinions the vision of our law that I see.

Posted by: Chris Geidner at May 3, 2004 04:12 PM

You're joking, right? What about the serial rapist who's been committing assaults since 1997 and is still at large?

Lucky for me I graduated in '98 and limited my jogs through the campus and by the rotunda.

Posted by: Brian at May 3, 2004 04:46 PM

Judging by some of the commentary here, it looks like there's a real market out there for federal judge/justice trading cards, complete with stats on the reverse ("Mr. Rhenquist's state's rights batting average hit an all time high in 1996....")

Posted by: Nick Morgan at May 3, 2004 05:55 PM

Funny you should mention that...

Oyez Baseball

Posted by: Brian at May 3, 2004 10:44 PM

I wish they'd have killed him.

Posted by: Earl at May 4, 2004 09:52 PM

I agree with Earl. I wish those guys had killed the little squirrel.

Posted by: Gary at May 4, 2004 09:54 PM

Wow, Gary agreed with Earl a mere two minutes later. Kinda funny how great minds think alike--especially when both have the same IP address. ;)

Posted by: Nick Morgan at May 5, 2004 05:26 PM
Sitting in Review
Armen (e-mail) #
PG (e-mail) #
Sean Sirrine (e-mail) #
About Us
Senior Status