When you appeal something to a federal court of appeal, I thought the outcome of the appeal wasn't supposed to depend on who you get on your panel. </snickering off>
Pregerson was having a snit, wasn't he? And he's wrong about his job description too. He's not their to "protect the people's rights." The judge is there to uphold the rule of law. The rights of the people are best protected by the jury - the true representatives of the people in the legal system.
This is a case where, hopefully, judicial activism will be tossed right into the wate basket, where it belongs.