Democratic-backed Susan Crawford wins Wisconsin Supreme Court seat, cementing liberal majority
Democratic-backed Susan Crawford wins Wisconsin Supreme Court seat, cementing liberal majority
apnews.com
Democratic-backed Susan Crawford wins Wisconsin Supreme Court seat, cementing liberal majority
I'm glad, but I'm still pretty damn irritated that we're all seemingly "ok" with the fact that we just have "liberal" and "conservative" judges.
They're supposed to be impartial. We shouldn't be able to tell how they're going to rule based on their political leaning, it should be purely about the law. :(
What would you like to call it if one stands for womens rights and the other wants to actively take them away?
If the judges have those personal beliefs and a case related to that comes before them I'd want them to consider the law not their personal beliefs, so we shouldn't have to be identifying them in this way.
We've come to identify them by their political leaning because it has come to the point that we get rulings based on their political leaning as opposed to what the law says. Hell it's why muskrat was pushing for "his" judge to win. He knew that the judge he backed would rule in his favor and we know he would have ruled in favor of Republicans plans for gerrymandering when that absofucukinglutly should not be the case. :(
They are referring to "liberal" being at the center, and that being the most "left" option.
Biden vs Bernie basically (and respectively to the above).
I would call them "unfit for their position" as a judge's personal beliefs have zero influence on the written law and a judge's job is to interpret the law as it is written. If you're bringing your personal politics into the courthouse as a judge you have failed your job requirements.
I am happy to see a liberal judge in our current situation, because conservative judges have been flagrantly abusing their positions for many years now, but the parent comment is correct. Having a liberal vs a conservative judge should be nonsensical. Unfortunately the nonsensical is commonplace in America now.
The rights need to be defined by the legislature. And the court needs to impartially rule as per law. There is of course, always room for interpretation.
These tankie communist have their heads so far up their asses.
I agree with your idea, but I also appreciate that they've dropped the facade.
The thing I've realized as I've gotten older is that the difference between liberal and conservative in the US is almost more a question of how we think rather than what we think. When I was younger I thought it was simply that conservative people had one set of values and liberals another, but that's flat out wrong.
The way information is presented to a conservative in their media is much different from how information is presented to a liberal is their media. This leads to a difference in how people think (or maybe the difference was there to begin with and they self selected their media of choice). Try having a conversation with a person of the opposite political persuasion, it's really hard because you both try to convert the argument to your own structure. Both people end up arguing over the structure more than the issue because once the structure has been agreed upon, the topic almost answers itself.
Once you realize that "liberal" and "conservative" is the way someone thinks and not just if they root for team R or team D, it's much easier to come to terms that judges are "liberal" or "conservative" at a more intrinsic level.
It’s a mask off session; hopefully we can remind people how the law is suppose to work and get unbiased professionals back in there.
Trump and Co. are trying to make it impossible, but it has to be our end goal. Restore the judiciary order.
For the people - not for profit!
Lawful neutral should be how it works, yes.
Unfortunately if your constitutional interpretation is forged in the meetings of the heritage foundation, that is impossible. I’m not sure how we get back to unpolitical judges, there’s so much money and power floating around the seats.
Yea that always icked me, never made sense how people with power to rule the law on a case by case basis, have any right to use their political beliefs instead of what the laws and constitution says.
The fact that you even vote for them is super weird.
It's all fucked. We barely trust the people we vote for so letting them pick the judges also leaves a sour taste in our mouths. We end up with a supreme court stacked with judges chosen by a right wing organization like the heritage foundation or the federalist society which have been stacking the courts with their people for decades. :(