I’m underwhelmed by the nomination, but it might be worth pointing out that the common perception that Bush promised a “strict constructionist” like Scalia and Thomas is an exaggeration. (Incidentally, do we have a high degree of confidence that Bush would know what a strict constructionist is? I don’t mean that as a put-down; it would be surprising if he did. The fact that he uses the phrase “strict constructionist” in the first place makes me think that the answer is no.) Bush made a point of saying that he admired Scalia and Thomas, but didn’t pledge to nominate clones of them. James Barnes wrote about this in the National Journal recently, but I don’t have a link.