Quickly rising to the top of my list of the things I don't want make the mistake of doing is writing something really stupid that gets Xrlq on my case -- like Judge James Whittemore did when he wrote an opinion in the Terri Schiavo case.

I initially overlooked this, as it rang stupid. I know, usually I catch stuff that seems stupid and bitch about it here, but this was different. Quite frankly, it was so stupid that I reflexively assumed it didn't really mean what it meant. Picture the guy who got caught with his hands in the cookie jar and protests that "I didn't do anything." Of course he did something. The only question is what. So when that wizbang judge James Whittemore - you know, that brainiac whose ignorance of the phrase de novo probably cost Terri Schiavo her life - ruled that Judge Greer was not a state actor, I brushed it off, assuming he couldn't possibly have actually meant that. Since then, however, in a lengthy and colorful debate with Patterico (commencing here), Patterico forced me to acknowledge what I initially overlooked: this lawtard really does believe that judges are not "state actors" for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment or, by extension, the rest of the Constitution.

Xrlq then points out all of the ridiculous things that someone would conclude if Whittemore's analysis were actually true.

Amendment I (freedom of speech): Fascist judges are free to enjoin any speech they want, as long as it is reasonably connected with the case they are ruling on. No state action, no First Amendment. Forget that silly case about libel plaintiffs having to prove the libel was false rather than the defendant having to prove it's true. Let's go back to the old common law rule. It's all judge-made law, after all, and goes back to a time when judges were supposed to make law.

And the hits just keep on coming -- read the whole thing.