Reader P.J.M. writes, “No, no, no, Ramesh. The Times’ point is obviously that we should start using instant replay to review judicial decisions.”

Reader D.F.T. writes,

CJ Roberts analogizes about balls and strikes, and the NYTimes references a blown call at first base–a decision the baseball umpire admitted he made on instinct. No one, well, outside of the NYTimes, expects Supreme Court justices to make split-second decisions on matters of the Constitution, despite the fact that baseball umpires regularly make split-second decisions on matters of less importance to the game of baseball than the outcome of a rare perfect game.
Not only does the NYTimes not offer an argument, what they offered isn’t even effective rhetoric.