I am totally confused. Here’s David Kirkpatrick: “An opinion-page article in The Los Angeles Times on Monday by Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor, included an account of Mr. Durbin’s question. Professor Turley cited unnamed sources saying that Judge Roberts had told Mr. Durbin he would recuse himself from cases involving abortion, the death penalty or other subjects where Catholic teaching and civil law can clash.” I think Kirkpatrick is reading too much into the Turley piece. Turley didn’t go quite as far as Kirkpatrick suggests he did. Turley’s account has Roberts saying that he would recuse himself “if the law required a ruling that his church considers immoral.” As I argued yesterday, the class of such rulings is much narrower than Turley seems to realize. But Turley did not say that Roberts had specifically mentioned abortion and the death penalty as issues that would trigger his recusal. And Kirkpatrick’s own account claims that Turley got it wrong. Not sure what to think.