Correction, amplication, apology
MOUNT DESERT, Oct. 2, 2022 - Four readers wrote to criticize my calling out Judge James E. Boasberg’s religion as a potential reason for his rulings favoring environmental groups which want stricter enforcement of the protections for endangered North Atlantic right whales.
One reader said I did not have any evidence that Boasberg is of a certain religion or whether he even has one.
That reader was correct and I apologize for stretching this premise. It did not conform to my usual standards.
I stand by my reporting of my interview with Richard Pace, NOAA scientist and chief writer of “Cryptic Mortality of North Atlantic right whales,” who told me right whales do not migrate through most Maine’s waters.
I hope someone plays the tape of my interview for Judge Boasberg, so he may moderate his extreme views.
I also stand by my reporting of plaintiffs shopping for friendly judges.
I’m pleased to see your apology. The comment about Judge Boasberg’s religious affiliation struck me as the one sour note in your otherwise excellent investigative reporting.
I tried to research his religious preference and could only find that he’d attended and was Chairman of the Board of St Alban’s School. And even if he is Jewish, he may be practicing or not, and he may or may not adhere to the dietary restrictions. If we start ruling out political and judicial candidates on the basis of the tenets of the religion they were born into, we’d soon have no one to fill the positions.
Ann Michelson Hirschhorn
Don't apologize for 'berg doing what 'bergs do to your country