Sorry. Can’t resist:
A federal judge was fuming yesterday over the case of left-leaning political blogger Andrew M. Sullivan, who was busted by park rangers on a Cape Cod national beach for pot possession on July 13, only to have the federal charges tossed by prosecutors.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert B. Collings wrote “fidelity to the law requires that the Court grant leave to the United States Attorney to dismiss the Violation Notice against Mr. Sullivan.” He added, “That the Court must so act does not require the Court to believe that the end result is a just one.”
Collings called the facts of the case “straightforward,” and suggested that Sullivan’s treatment runs afoul of the notion that “all persons stand equal before the law.”
“It is quite apparent Mr. Sullivan is being treated differently from others,” Collings wrote. “In fact, there were other persons who were required to appear who were charged with the same offense and who were being prosecuted.”
Not a word concerning this issue is found on Sullivan’s own blog. That’s fine; I imagine that his lawyer told him to shut up about it. But that doesn’t justify the double-standards he appears to be benefiting from And then there is this:
Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit.com wrote that punishment for “a bit of pot” was unnecessary, but contended that “Andrew would no doubt make a big deal out of any special treatment afforded to a member of the Palin family under similar circumstances.”
Exactly right. And on that note . . .