NY Times says only conservative justices should be appointed to the US Supreme Court

Well, okay, at least they said it in 1916:

The Supreme Court, by its very nature, must be a conservative body; it is the conservator of our institutions, it protects the people against the errors of their legislative servants, it is the defender of the Constitution itself. To place upon the Supreme Bench judges who hold a different view of the function of the court, to supplant conservatism by radicalism, would be to undo the work of John Marshall and strip the Constitution of its defenses. It would introduce endless confusion where order has reigned, it would tend to give force and effect to any whim or passion of the hour, to crown with success any transitory agitation engaged in by a part of the people, overriding the matured judgment of all the people as expressed in their fundamental law.

—NYT, 1916, opposing the appointment of Louis Brandeis to the court

Ironically, Brandeis was the kind of judge that the NYT swoons over today.