Patterico's Pontifications

1/5/2011

L.A. Times Article on Prop. 8 Rulings Omits Mention of Reinhardt’s Pathetic Defense of His Refusal to Recuse Himself

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General,Scum — Patterico @ 7:57 am

Last March, Jack Dunphy noted an L.A. Times article that consulted legal experts on the all-important question of whether Justice Thomas would be allowed to have a wife who is a political activist. (The experts said yes.) Dunphy noted that the editors seemed to have no similar concern over the liberal Stephen Reinhardt, whose wife heads up the local ACLU.

Now Reinhardt has refused to recuse himself in a case where his wife’s ACLU signed on to an amicus brief in the very same case — arguing that it is hunky dory because the brief was filed in the trial court, while he is sitting on the appellate court, which is totally different. Because, after all, what relationship does an appellate court have to the trial court? All he’s doing is deciding whether the trial court got it right . . . by ruling the way his wife urged them to do in a brief. See? No connection at all!

So I ran to the L.A. Times to see what the experts had to say about this.

And, oddly, it appears that Carol J. Williams’s article on the Prop. 8 rulings yesterday totally fails to mention Reinhardt’s recusal denial.

It’s almost as if a double standard is at work.

9 Responses to “L.A. Times Article on Prop. 8 Rulings Omits Mention of Reinhardt’s Pathetic Defense of His Refusal to Recuse Himself”

  1. you left out one “pathetic”. You headline should read “L.A. Times Pathetic Article on Prop.8…”

    great unknown (261470)

  2. And, oddly, it appears that Carol J. Williams’s article on the Prop. 8 rulings yesterday totally fails to mention Reinhardt’s recusal denial.

    Well, to be fair, the fact that Reinhardt denied recusal is old news.

    Kman (d30fc3)

  3. So what? The experts couldn’t fully evaluate his decision until he published his reasoning — and that happened yesterday.

    Patterico (a0877b)

  4. To be fair, kmart is a poor sophist. Carol Williams is a serial offender, no? Never will she be accused of committing an act of journolistism.

    JD (6e25b4)

  5. Patterico

    Kman’s objections are unrelated to facts.

    Aaron Worthing (1a6294)

  6. Reinhardt’s reasoning could have been simpler: “When you’re 79 years old, you get your handjobs wherever you can.”

    Thank God for real term limits.

    nk (db4a41)

  7. The Reinhardt situation is obviously different. He and his wife are good people.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  8. As for Kman, we need a better class of trolls.

    Returning to topic, nk hit it on the … errr, nk got the best response.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  9. “As always, Kman’s objections are unrelated to facts.”

    AW – FTFY

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4452 secs.