A reader on Reddit named Poster of Peace posted a question-
Can we stop pretending that Judges aren’t biased?
This poster is absolutely right. Judges are not unbiased and it’s ridiculous to pretend they are.
How can we predict with almost 100% accuracy how the majority of the SCOTUS will vote on any one particular issue?
Why was this election largely viewed as the battle for SCOTUS, with the conservative expected to pick conservatives who have a conservative bias?
That’s why the dems always insist that judges be a woman, Hispanic, gay, black, muslim, or some minority. They depend n that bias
The only way to drain the swamp is a Convention of States. Abbott’s idea to counter the courts is a good one, others are term limits (even for judges below supreme level), and repeal of the 17th amendment. The whole “anchor baby” meme needs to be fully and clearly ended and the second amendment clearly and unquestionably changed to an individual right of “citizens” vs “the people”.
Gee I’m retarded and I knew that
Of course judges are biased. That was an important criteria for the worthless Kenyan commie. Look at the two disgraceful, unqualified amateurs he put on the bench!
Clean the Leftist scum out of the judiciary. Trump’s authority is clear. And the SCOTUS already heard the case in 1950.
Saw this in the comments here.
http://althouse.blogspot.de/2017/02/a-federal-appeals-court-early-sunday.html
Was this heard by the court already?
I’m slightly retarded so I’m not sure how to find the answer.
Read ‘Men in Black’ by Mark Levin (I know he’s persona non grata now) but it catalogs some of the low life scum that have worn robes and exposed rulings that were not based on the constitution, but on personal policy preferences. That’s why Harry Reid created the nuclear option, so obama could pack the courts with leftist activists.
It’s hard to listen to a Leftist claim that,
especially after Hillary listed
her
criteriabias-litmus testfor the Supreme Court Justices.
I hope this revelation is coming as no shock to any discerning conservative. The woman who lives directly across the street from us, a federal district court judge appointed by Clinton during his first term, came over to chat late last summer as we were finishing up a large landscape project to tell us that they were putting their house on the market and moving to a condo. In the course of our conversation she asked that we let them know of any on the market in the Queen Anne area of Seattle because they don’t want to leave the area. Apparently condo inventory is low right now. We asked if she’d looked in the Magnolia neighborhood just west of us; an area of Seattle with quiet neighborhoods, pretty public parks and local businesses. (Now, Geoff C. has had a couple of lively debates with the judge over the 2nd A., one in which she said she didn’t think anyone had a right to own any kind of gun and Geoff C. said something along the lines of, “..except that pesky little comma in there.” LOL) She was so arrogant as to stand in OUR front yard, look seriously into our eyes and declare, “Oh no, there are way too many Republicans in Magnolia.”
Their house sold last week! It’s taken over 35 years, but we outlasted them. I hope it’s a nice, gun-owning,
..Bible clinging young couple who bought the place.
Now wait, I say wait a minute, hee-awh… If judges can not be anointed magically unbiased — and expert, of course — then how can everybody else cover their own posteri-oars with a claim of “I was just following orders.”? If you’re a judge, and you see what seems to be an “unusual” ruling before you, that is now being questioned, how can you claim to believe — as divine, gospel, truth — the writings of the known race, gender, and/or sex partner preference hating judge that wrote the document, and thereby wash your own hands of guilt for obeying it, if you don’t claim to believe — as divine, gospel, truth — that all judges are created equal? If you’re a government enforcer, how can you protect yourself from perfectly valid charges of treason, if you can not claim to “only, and always be, just following orders.” — if you first admit that not all judges are created equal? And if magically anointed unbiased government is viewed as “just seeing what we can get away with, this time,” then how short will it be until the herd starts emulating such Professionally Better behavior? (Increasing expenses, thus cutting into the profit margin.)
Add a clause to the oath that prohibits judges from ignoring the Constitution with consequences so severe that very few will be tempted. I’m thinking a 30 year jail sentence would be time enough to discourage others who think they are clever enough to legislate from the bench.