Michael's question

After linking to my colleague Cathy Kaveny's new essay in Commonweal on the "torture memos" -- which, as Michael says, is well worth reading -- Michael asks, "[h]as Robby George (Princeton, Politics) written anything critical of the 'Torture Memo'?" 

Now, I assume that none of us has any doubt -- at least, none of us could reasonably have any doubt -- that Professor George agrees entirely with Michael that torture is immoral and unjustifiable.  I assume we also all agree that "torture" is not self-defining, and that a government lawyer or administration is not immoral or corrupt for trying to find a definition of that term that is both workable and legally and morally defensible.  (Which is not to say that the definitions employed or defended in the "torture memos" are workable and morally and legally defensible).  And, I would hope we could agree that Professor George is not obligated, by virtue of his support for the Bush Administration's position on, say, abortion, to write articles about the immorality of torture or of the Bush Administration's approach to interrogating detainees.  Certainly, he could oppose without reservation the Bush Administration's policy relating to interrogation of detainees but still reasonably decide that, because many, many others are quite willing and able to criticize this policy, it is his (more lonely) lot to devote his time and energy to, say, writing in opposition to embryonic-stem-cell research or the abortion license.