It has come to my attention that there was an inaccuracy in a parenthetical statement I made in my column about John Roberts, dated July 28, 2005. In fact, while it has been uncommon in recent years for Supreme Court nominees to have had as little experience on the bench as Roberts (eight of the last 10 nominees had more judicial experience than Roberts), it is far from unheard of, as I initially claimed.
While I still am dismayed by Roberts' lack of a record from which we can assess his qualifications, I apologize for my erroneous assertion.
