A Los Angeles Times headline reads:
A veteran judge will rule on the legality of the NSA’s warrantless anti-terror surveillance. Greenpeace is among the petitioners.
A veteran judge! That sounds like quite a compliment — as if the paper thinks this is really a great judge! So I’ll give you one guess as to which President appointed the judge. Hint: I guessed easily.
Answer below the fold.
Yes, you guessed right. The judge was appointed by President Carter. The paper must be expecting an anti-Bush ruling.
There is good reason to. The judge, Anna Diggs Taylor, once engaged in a highly unusual attempt to take the Michigan affirmative action case from a conservative judge:
Earlier, Chief Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of the federal District Court in Detroit tried to take the suit against the law school away from Judge Bernard Freedman, who had been assigned it through a blind draw–and who was suspected of being skeptical about affirmative action–and consolidate it with a similar suit against the university’s undergraduate admissions practice, which Judge Patrick Duggan was hearing. The chief judge dropped that effort was dropped after the judge hearing the law school complaint went public with a blistering opinion objecting to what he termed “the highly irregular” effort of the chief judge. Judge Duggan ruled in favor of the undergraduate racial preferences, while Judge Freedman ruled against the law school preferences.
That’s the kind of judge the L.A. Times describes as a “veteran judge.” Just in case you were wondering.
Expect the surveillance to be declared unlawful by the “veteran judge.”