Josh Marshall, on the oddity of keeping SCOTUSBlog from getting credentials.

I generally don’t agree with Josh Marshall about what color the sky is, but this is pretty much correct:

At the end of the day, all of it comes down to this. SCOTUSBlog is the preeminent source of real-time and journalistic reporting on the Supreme Court in the country. I say this with full knowledge that there are many extremely talented Supreme Court and legal affairs reporters working for various newspapers and news outlets. And it’s no disrespect at all to them. (I have no idea who the best individual Supreme Court reporter is.) The simple fact is that whenever a big case comes down, basically everyone goes to SCOTUSBlog to get the first read on what happened. This is quite simply a fact.

So you have this perverse situation in which what is arguably and close to objectively the top source of reporting and commentary on the Supreme Court being basically the only ones who aren’t credentialed to cover it. That’s the problem with this decision. From what I can see, the rules don’t at all prevent the committee from issuing SCOTUSBLog a credential. If the rules do, then the rules are outmoded and should change.

…and I’m aware, yah, that there’s a definite left-wing slant to the site’s reporting these days. I can compensate for it, just like I can for David Nir’s politics when he’s talking about electoral district demographics and voting histories. What’s important to me is the data, and SCOTUSBlog is invaluable in that regard. Left, Right, Center, or Beyond Pluto*. They should get the dang credentials.

Via Instapundit.

Moe Lane

*Which is a planet.