An editorial blog by Stephen Henderson in the Free Press yesterday focuses in on answers to endorsement questionnaires by candidate Zahra in 2004 and 2006. Henderson says that although Zahra is widely described as a judicial conservative in synch with the Court's other conservatives, that description "fails to capture the texture and nuance of his approach to judging". For example, Zahra expresses support for judicial appointment over election, a view at odds with current conservative thinking on the subject. And he disdains the labelling that has become a standard feature of judicial campaign rhetoric:
"Labels such as strict constructionist, liberal, textualist, activist and conservative are, in the end, stereotypes that, although not entirely without foundation, prove to be divisive and unproductive," he wrote. "There is an accepted single set of laws that govern the interpretation and application of statutes and constitutional provisions."
