Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly....it's no longer about being able to review laws passed by the legislative branch for their constitutionality, which is the true job of the judiciary, but now it's about being "empathetic" and righting perceived wrongs through activism behind the bench.
Sure, every judge comes to the bench with their own biases and political beliefs, but the mark of a true jurist is the willingness and ability to put aside those kinds of biases and to objectively use the Constitution as the guide and to rule according to the actual law and not to invent new meanings.
What's disappointing to me isn't that Obama wants liberal and activist judges, which is no surprise, but that he'd make such a stupid comment regarding being "empathetic" instead of being accomplished scholars of the US Constitution. Of course that's probably no surprise either, given that Obama doesn't seem to view the US Constitition as anything more than a compelling suggestion.
Their job IS to go by their feelings, their instincts, their intellect, and whatever else they need, including the opinions and decisions of foreign courts, to render decisions for HUMAN BEINGS. .
Where did you learn those "facts" with regards to the US Constitution and our legal system?
Then let's put in a Justice Robot who has no emotions and can access millions of cases in a few nanoseconds. Yes, we don't need humans to dispense justice.
Their job IS to go by their feelings, their instincts, their intellect, and whatever else they need, including the opinions and decisions of foreign courts, to render decisions for HUMAN BEINGS. I'm glad you won't be considered for this opening.
Foreign courts? Feelings? Instinct?
What happened to judging based on facts?
We have a constitution and we don't need to ask how Russia or France would handle it. This is the USA not the world Gov.
We need Judges who both understand the constitution and are willing to uphold our laws.
Ever sit on a jury? Part of the directions you receive are to put aside your personal feelings and focus upon the facts and evidence at hand.
How can wehold a supreme court justice to a lower standard than someone on a jury?
What's disappointing to me isn't that Obama wants liberal and activist judges, which is no surprise, but that he'd make such a stupid comment regarding being "empathetic" instead of being accomplished scholars of the US Constitution. Of course that's probably no surprise either, given that Obama doesn't seem to view the US Constitition as anything more than a compelling suggestion.
I agree.
There's a time and place for political rhetoric and this was neither.
But then again, Bush said he was picking the most qualified person when he tried to appoint that . . janitor woman. She was a good friend.
So, which do you prefer - an appointment based on political liberal idealism, or just plain cronyism.
Then let's put in a Justice Robot who has no emotions and can access millions of cases in a few nanoseconds. Yes, we don't need humans to dispense justice.
Their job IS to go by their feelings, their instincts, their intellect, and whatever else they need, including the opinions and decisions of foreign courts, to render decisions for HUMAN BEINGS. I'm glad you won't be considered for this opening.
The law is not supposed to be gray, fuzzy, unclear, pliable, and vague, and judges are not suppose just dictate rulings based on their empathy or what is going on in some Chinese governments court room..
Am I aloud to run a red light depending upon the sex, race, social upbringing, sexual preferences or political leanings, of the judge ruling on my case?
Two people, with the exact same job, salary, marriage status, financial obligations ect... fail to pay their home mortgage for six months, and the same judge can rule differently on both cases, simply by allowing them to be influenced by their emotions?
If the law is poorly written, then congress needs to fix it, and not just allow supreme court justices to make wildly different rulings, based on the emotional roller coaster of their feelings on any given day.
Soooooo........ He is going to ask his appointee that he is empathetic in his decisions on how he interprets the constitution. Codeword liberalism in no uncertain terms which is fine by me... I have never met an emphatic neoCON, have you?
Whatever it takes for you to maintain your ego of superiority.
Which people have been proven to give more to charity again, conservatives or liberals?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
