USA Today runs a stunningly dishonest commentary
July 23, 2013 Leave a Comment
A recent commentary in USA Today is one of the most stunningly dishonest opinion pieces I’ve seen in a long time.
Ilya Somin, a law professor at Koch-funded George Mason University, wrote about several recent unanimous Supreme Court decisions that she claims served as a check against overreach by President Obama:
When a president pursues policies that require such expansive federal power that he can’t get a single justice to agree, something is probably amiss.
The problem? Every single case she mentioned, while decided by the Supreme Court in the last couple of years, actually originated during previous administrations. The facts in Horne v. Department of Agriculture date back to the Clinton Administration. Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency and Arkansas Game & Fish Administration v. United States both date back to the Bush administration. A unanimous decision regarding religious employees also dates back to the Bush Administration, as did United States v. Jones, dealing with whether a search warrant is required to place a GPS tracking device on a suspect’s car.
Every single example, in other words, dealt with a position originally taken by a previous administration then subsequently defended by the Justice Department as the case wound through the court system. Not one of these represented a policy pursued by Obama.
I presume that Somin knew this. If not, she should not be teaching law. If so, she should not be publishing commentaries in national newspapers. The editors at USA Today owe the readers they have allowed to be misinformed an apology. They should have fact-checked this piece before running it. The only ethical recourse left to them now is to retract it. Otherwise, readers will be left to wonder if they can trust the facts in any commentary that appears in the newspaper.