Opinion: In today’s pages: A judge’s porn, a justice’s dissent
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
The editorial board applauds the Supreme Court’s decision confirming habeas rights for Guantanamo detainees, and asks the NBA to tell its fans the truth about accusations of rigged games. The board also says Judge Alex Kozinski is well within his rights to view porn, even if he should probably recuse himself from an obscenity trial:
Scolds who argue that judges should uphold a higher standard of decorum than the common citizen and should somehow be prevented from engaging in such private activity as gathering subjectively amusing or even appalling smut should recall that the 1st Amendment is not limited to high-minded endeavors.
Jewish Journal of Los Angeles columnist Tom Teicholz notes that former Nazis remain free because no country will accept them. UCLA School of Law’s David Kaye says Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the Guantanamo case makes it harder to solve the problem. And columnist Joel Stein decries the language of wine snobbery: ‘When wine drinkers tell me they taste notes of cherries, tobacco and rose petals, usually all I can detect is a whole lot of jackass.’
On the letters page, readers discuss The Times’ editorial on immigration. Donald Hirt of Paso Robles asks, ‘Is it the position of The Times that enforcing our laws is irrational?’
*Art by David Suter for The Times.