Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 3 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
To the editor:
One issue that has come up in the Presidential campaign is that of future Supreme Court appointees. Would Americans be better off with Bush’s or Dukakis’ selections?
There’s no history to tell us how Mr. Bush might choose, though everything points to “middle of the road” selections.
There is for Gov. Dukakis, as he has picked two of the seven-member Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court, Justices Paul Liacos and Ruth Abrams. The former was appointed despite several objections by the pertinent Massachusetts State Bar Committee. How have these two judges ruled? Check a few of their decisions:
• In opposition to their five colleagues, Gov. Dukakis’ two appointees held that a 25-year mandatory jail sentence for major drug dealders constitutes cruel or unusual punishment.
• Early in 1988, Justice Liacos reduced bail for a Costa Rican cocaine dealer from $500,000 to $50,000; five lower courts had accepted the high figure. The dealer fled this country.
• In the case of a man who posed
83.8%