One reason Greenhouse’s critics have not conducted the type of analysis that Dellinger suggests is that it’s a completely ridiculous method. He says we should see how often her reports erred in their implicit predictions about where the Court would end up, and whether those errors typically skew in a liberal or conservative direction. But if she were a liberal optimist or a conservative pessimist, the predictions would err in the exact same way. Bad predictions are not the sort of bias that rightly sets people off: It’s the way she characterizes the various positions in a debate that’s most problematic.