[ by Charles Cameron — lady justice courted by an unsuitable suitor? ]
Kavanaugh‘s op-ed. and my learned friend’s comment:
Wikipedia, Nemo iudex in causa sua Wall Street Journal, I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge
One of the texts embedded in our Zenpundit graphical header is by James Madison in Federalist 10:
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.
I think we have two or three headers, so look up at the top of this page and you may see it..
Of course, writing an op-ed isn’t a judgment, it’s not an amicus curiae brief either — it’s advocacy, in fact self-representation. So maybe the better legal tag would be:
A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.
Even that’s not exact, but I don’t know quite how to pin it down: something is fishy in the state of play? Is that vague enough? I think there’s an ouroboros loose in the title of Judge Kavanaugh’s op-ed, is all..
Written after the procedural vote and before the final vote:
In his WSJ op-ed, Judge Kavanaugh says, “I Said a Few Things I Should Not Have Said”. Is someone who at a crucial point under oath addressing the Senate Judiciary Committee, by his own admission said things, acutely partisan, visibly furious things he should not have said, is someone to be relied upon to avoid doing the same on the Supreme bench on issues of inflamed political passions and high consequences?