My latest New Ledger column is up. You can glean what it is about from the opening few paragraphs:
I wrote recently, in the context of the current Supreme Court appointment: “Supreme Court nominations seem to create something of a madhouse atmosphere in journalistic circles. The coverage of political battles is incomplete and replete with error. The coverage of judicial personalities is tinged with a general inability to grapple with the jurisprudence of the personalities in question. It’s not easy to go through a Supreme Court nomination process with anything approaching public dignity and decorum; the degree to which journalists fall down on the job in covering the nomination process makes achieving dignity and decorum that much harder.”
It gives me no joy whatsoever to write that my cynical attitude towards press coverage of jurisprudential issues in general, and the current judicial confirmation wars concerning Justice David Souter’s replacement in particular, has been reinforced by Adam Cohen’s latest editorial on jurisprudential philosophy. Cohen means his editorial to serve as an attack on conservative judges. But in preparing it, he has substituted stereotyping for serious thought.