Newspaper of corrections

Sheesh! The NYTimes just cannot get their facts straight on Supreme Court Nominee Judge John Roberts.  Take a look at these corrections (via Regret The Error) – all made on one day (8-11-05):

A front-page article on Thursday about the furor caused by a television advertisement criticizing Judge John G. Roberts Jr. for an argument he made before the Supreme Court in an abortion-related case included an erroneous report from the ad’s sponsor, Naral Pro-Choice America, about the involvement of one cable network. While Naral bought time on CNN and on stations in Maine and Rhode Island, it did not book the ad on the Fox News Channel. (A spokesman said Naral had intended advertise on Fox but had never struck a deal – a decision of which he was unaware when he issued the list to the press.) Link

An article on Wednesday about comments by Judge John G. Roberts Jr. on the evolution of law governing end-of-life issues surrounding the Terri Schiavo case misstated a word in a 1928 Supreme Court dissent by Justice Louis D. Brandeis cited by Judge Roberts. The opinion spoke of "the right to be let alone" – not "left" alone.

The article also misstated the year in which Judge Roberts filed a brief with the Supreme Court arguing, successfully, that a century-old antidiscrimination statute could not be used to quash protests at abortion clinics. It was 1993, not 1971. Link

An article on July 22 about efforts by the White House to shore up support for Judge John G. Roberts Jr. among social-issue conservatives, a full year before he was nominated for the Supreme Court, referred incorrectly to his dissent in a case before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, involving the arroyo toad. (The error was repeated in articles on July 23 and on Tuesday.) Judge Roberts said the court should rehear the case and consider whether the Interior Department had properly invoked the Endangered Species Act in this circumstance. He did not say the federal government lacked the power to block a California real estate development because it endangered the toad. Link

An article on July 20 about preparations by advocacy groups to oppose Judge Roberts also referred incorrectly to his dissent. He did not question the constitutionality of the Endangered Species Act. Link

Hat tip: reader "Stoo" – thanks!

Related: Michelle Malkin and Patterico both note how the NYTimes finally gives mention to the Air Enron story and gets that one wrong as well ❗

(Linking up with the OTB Traffic Jam)

Comments are closed.