I realize that by reading this blog it is not readily apparent, but actually a large part of my academic studies has been on the phenomena of blogging- milblogging specifically.
As an undergrad, I was in journalism school and trying to reconcile the ideas that milbloggers are some of the only true ways to get reliable information about contemporary warfighting with the fact that my professors were telling me that bloggers were bad sources. In grad school, one of my first papers was on the historiography of milblogs.
Enter this article from the NY Times.
I'm not sure if they're more about (a) a Supreme Court Justice mistaking law fact (but really, I don't believe they are truly expected to know UCMJ law- even though it would certainly be applicable in this case) (b) none of the other briefs filed mentioned this (c) no major MSM news outlet caught the mistake (d) Child rape has in fact been an executable crime and in practice, not just theory or (e) that the one to break the story was a blogger.
I don't know what the "punchline" of the story is. I think that is is certainly admirable that they are finally doing their homework and consulting reliable blogs, and it has been a long time coming. It is just really interesting and you can bet that I will be seeing if this trend continues...