As Jason quoted, Robert Bork judged the justices of the Supreme Court to be "lack[ing] any guidance other than their own attempts at moral philosophy, a task for which they have not even minimal skills." Bork's own moral preferences seem rather clear, including his bias against "normaliz[ing] homosexuality." In light of this latest instance of someone who ought to know better pretending that Lawrence applied only to same-sex sodomy, consider me to be a homosexual.

I'm more inclined to be amused by the kind of humor displayed by a New Hampshire judge dealing with local law enforcement's using criminal trespass charges to deal with illegal immigrants:

"Am I going to determine whether someone is here legally or not?" [Judge L. Phillips Runyon III] asked the prosecutor. "Isn't that what the federal immigration system is for? Is it for part-time district court judges like me who know nothing about immigration and arguably nothing much about anything else either?"

(It's pretty old news; the undocumented worker in question pleaded guilty to two charges and agreed to report to immigration authorities.)

UPDATE: This is the same case to which Sean refers.