premise: Reading between the lines: Judge Stearns used some choice descriptions for the Cape Wind opponents, calling Cape Wind's opponent's "obdurate" and saying that while they typically "claim the mantle of environmentalism," the opponents in this case "have doffed their green garb and draped themselves in the banner of free-market economics." One part of the complaint, Stearns said, referenced documents that "contradict on their face a supposed fact as plead" to make an argument that is "misleading and ultimately untrue." In a footnote, Stearns also wrote that were he an economist or a conservationist instead of a judge, <hypo>, but that elected officials, regulators and the courts have reviewed and approved the project.
hypothesis: <hypo> should be "he may have rejected Cape Wind"