Todd Zywicki links to Lott's take on Alito. Lott cites a study by Choi and Gulati but gets taken to task in comments by Frank Cross who writes:
Perhaps unsurprisingly, this review by John Lott is quite misleading. Under Choi & Gulati's citation-based measure of judicial quality, Alito comes out very poorly, well down in the bottom half of all circuit court judges. That was their primary measure, and Lott doesn't mention it.
Lott, cherry picking? Who'd have thought it? Lott defends himself in later comments (under his own name, even!) . I haven't read Choi and Gulati's paper so I don't know for sure who is right here, but I know who I would bet on.
Update: Zywicki has a followup post with a couple more comments here.
More like this
The Chicago Tribune reports:
Last year an anonymous person from the American Enterprise Institute
repeatedly tried and failed to remove all
criticism of Lott from his
wikipedia page. He
At the The High Road there was some discussion of the cherry picked Lott article I discussed here. One poster, "agricola", criticized Lott, linking to my blog.
On July 12 The Columbus Dispatch published a letter from Paul van Doorn replying to an earlier letter from David Mayer that I commented on. Here is an extract (hyperlinks added by me):
Tim, what happened to your comments on the thread on the Volokh thread? I thought I saw at least one post from you there.