(no subject)
When your first attempt to discredit a judicial nominee involves an indirect attack on Justice Marshall, you might want to think twice. You're usually going to be making a mistake. (No, it really doesn't matter which Justice Marshall; they're both pretty much impervious).
But when the merits of your attack involve disagreeing with Justice Thurgood Marshall that the Constitution that permitted and recognized slavery was "defective" prior to the Thirteenth Amendment, there's no "might" about it.
But when the merits of your attack involve disagreeing with Justice Thurgood Marshall that the Constitution that permitted and recognized slavery was "defective" prior to the Thirteenth Amendment, there's no "might" about it.