In a recent speech, a prominent federal judge called the outcomes in last Term's Supreme Court decisions in Kelo v. New London and Gonzales v. Raich "unwise."

  On the question of Kelo v. New London, the eminent domain case, this prominent federal judge explained that "the free play of market forces is more likely to produce acceptable results in the long run than the best-intentioned plans of public officials." As for Gonzales v. Raich, the medical marijuana case, the judge explained that "I agree with the policy choice made by the millions of California voters."

  The name of this prominent federal judge? John Paul Stevens, the author of the majority decisions in Kelo and Raich, who explained that while he opposed the results in both cases as a matter of policy, he felt compelled to reach them as a matter of law.

  UPDATE: Mike Rappaport responds over at The Right Coast: "Give me a break."