Judge in NSA case in ACLU's pocket? - Page 6 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #51 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 10:51 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Veteran
 
67_250SE's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
Judges impose their personal philosophies all time. I get the impression that if Scalia imposed his judicial philosophy on us, you would be ok with that, but when someone you disagrees with does, well then!
You did not read my post.

Take a deep breath and, for a moment, get off your anti-conservative, anti-Bush bandwagon.

I DO NOT want any judge, liberal, conservative, whatever, imposing his philosphies on me, or on anyone else.

Judge should be like laundry detergent "scent free."

Or content-free.

All I want the judge to do is look at the law, look at the facts and, based ON the law and the facts ONLY, decide the issue.

Wopuld you want a Catholic judge to ban ALL abortions?

Would you want a PETA friendly judge to rule that you can't eat meat?

I hope not.

Today is a liberal judge fucking up witht eh law. Tomorrow is a conservative judge doing it.

Is that the kind of society that YOU want?
67_250SE is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #52 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 10:53 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Judges are constrained by the law.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #53 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 11:00 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Bruce R.'s Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 14,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
Judges are constrained by the law.
Unfortunetly many of them think:
( 1 ) They ARE the law
( 2 ) They can do anything they damn well please.

Looks to me like this dippy broad thinks she can follow both one and two as outlined above....

"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
Vladimir Putin

"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94


"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas
Bruce R. is offline  
post #54 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 12:26 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67_250SE
Would you suggest that it is proper for a judge who has intimate ties with the ACLU to not disclose the exiostence of those ties?

Had they known about the judge's intimate financial ties witht he ACLU the government attorneys could have:

1. Known about the situation and be ready for it; and
2. Had the opportunity to brief the issue of the apparent conflict of interest (apparent or real) and build a case for appeal.

Judges must be purer than Caesar's wife.

Anything less than that corrupts the system.

Regardless of how you come on the issue, you should be horrified by the blatant judge-shopping that went on here.

And for those who think that this is no big deal, and that judge shopping does not have a detrimental effect on the judicial system, then why are liberals so vehemently opposed to ANY judicial appointment by President Bush.

Think about it.
For clarification, read the messages following the one you quote above.
Botnst is offline  
post #55 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 01:34 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Veteran
 
67_250SE's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
Judges are constrained by the law.
Yes and no.

The judge in question is a Federal Circuit Judge. She is a trial judge.

She can do pretty much what she wants. If the losing party does not like it, the party must appeal the judge's decision.

That is expensive and it takes time.

Effectively then, her ruling becomes law until a party appeals it or unless it come sup in another case and she is reversed.

So yes, technically she must follow the flaw, but in effect she is pretty much free to do as she pleases.

Plus, consider this, federal judges have lifetime appointments. It is like tenure for college professors. ONLY way to get rid og a bad federal judge is through impeachment. Not an easy task.

You still did not answer my question: Do you want a system where judges (liberal OR conservative) get to impose their philosophies on you instead of simply ruling on the law?

It is a simple question.
67_250SE is offline  
post #56 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 01:40 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Veteran
 
67_250SE's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
For clarification, read the messages following the one you quote above.
I have done that.

It is not the fact of her membership, per se, that creates an issue. It is the fact that she hid her membership from the opposing litigants.

At the very least she should have told everyone and then let the chips fall where they may.

There is a quantum leap difference between an association that educates the public about the constitution, like The Constitutional Rights Foundation and an organization that engages in active advocacy, like the ACLU.

I have no problem with a judge having ties to the CRF but Ihave a problem with a judge having ties with the ACLU (or any other advocacy group).

If it was up to me, the only organizations that a judge could belong to are organization that promote education but do not engage in actual courtroom advocacy.
67_250SE is offline  
post #57 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 02:50 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
To me, membership is not the issue.

Failure to disclose membership IS an issue.

I don't care if a judge is a member of Nambla, just so long as we all know it going into pretrial. Then we can make motions if we feel so moved.

Okay, I do care if a judge is a member of Nambla.

Brings an interesting question: where would I draw the boundary?

I don't know, but I do believe a blanket prohibition against political affiliation is worse than no retrisctions. A judge that has no connection to society would be weird and even scary.

B
Botnst is offline  
post #58 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 02:55 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67_250SE
...

You still did not answer my question: Do you want a system where judges (liberal OR conservative) get to impose their philosophies on you instead of simply ruling on the law?

It is a simple question.
And the answer is equally simple: It is impossible for anybody to use judgment without calling upon one's powers of reasoning. Reason is a tool powered by the core of one's humanity and guided by the reins of philosophy.

Therefore, if one wishes to have judges, one must hire judges who have a clear and honest perspective on the law. As a political process--which appointing is, by design and intent--one then goes through a process to determine whether the judgment of the candidate is acceptable.

B
Botnst is offline  
post #59 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 03:10 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Veteran
 
67_250SE's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
And the answer is equally simple: It is impossible for anybody to use judgment without calling upon one's powers of reasoning. Reason is a tool powered by the core of one's humanity and guided by the reins of philosophy.

Therefore, if one wishes to have judges, one must hire judges who have a clear and honest perspective on the law. As a political process--which appointing is, by design and intent--one then goes through a process to determine whether the judgment of the candidate is acceptable.

B
I am glad you drew the line at NAMBLA. Many judges have been forced to cancel memberships on white-only clubs or male-only clubs.

You don't have to be a judge. It is an honor that many actively seek. Accordingly, they should accept whatever conditions and restrictions the people chose to impose upon memberships and clubs.

A judge is more than the sum total of his or her legal scholarship. No doubt about that.

Your statement that: "Reason is a tool powered by the core of one's humanity and guided by the reins of philosophy" makes for a nice bumper sticker. But it does not stand up to close, analytical scrutiny.

Reason does not need philosphy to do its work. In fact, cold reason is best exercised without the interference of personal philosophies. they get on the way of a srictly intellectual result.

When philosophy ceases to be a "rein" and instead becomes a guiding principle, then judges get into trouble. and we have seen examples of this through our nation's history. During the Reconstruction, there were federal judges, at all levels of the judiciary, who held the core philopshical principle that blacks are inferior and do not deserve equal treatment under the law. In order to give effect to their racist philosophies, they twisted and turned the plain meaning of words and thus fashion a legal system where blacks were in fact deemed to be inferior (not in so many words) and were denied equal access to the law.

Philosphy and its child: morals, are highly personal matters. I don't want judges who are mindless law-reading robots. by the same token, however, I do not want them to impose their belief-system on me or on others.

There is a big problem when judges go beyond reading or interpreting the law in light of precedent and then apply it to the facts of the case.

If you think that a woman has the right to chose whether or not to gt an abortion, then you would not want judges imposing their pro-life view of the world on all of us.

If you believe that the government should be given certain tools in the fight against terrorism, then you would not want anti-government judges ruling from the bench.

Asssuming that we want judges who are than mere law-reading robots, then how do you propose that we eliminate judicial legislation? After all, judges (federal) judges are not voted on by the people and are not subject to direct recall by the people whose lives are deeply impacted by their decisions.

I'd like to read what you would propose in order to eliminate bias (left or right) in judges' decisions. Or are you willing to accept their biased decisions as a cost of doing business.

Last edited by 67_250SE; 08-26-2006 at 03:20 PM.
67_250SE is offline  
post #60 of 116 (permalink) Old 08-26-2006, 04:27 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Laws are, by their nature, an imposition of beliefs. They are the codification of morals.

Thus, to understand the application of law one must have a common moral basis from which to draw and a philosophy that guides that implementation.

To suggest that a judge who is bereft of a moral philosophy is the pinnacle is to be judged by a psychopath.

Your bumper is bigger than mine.

B
Botnst is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    COURT: NSA Wiretaps Must End rstone Off-Topic 150 08-26-2006 12:29 PM
    NSA: We are Powerless! rstone Off-Topic 2 08-09-2006 09:37 AM
    Security Expert Says Microsoft Placed NSA Backdoor In Windows. firstmb Off-Topic 9 04-08-2006 05:01 PM
    EFF suing AT&T for helping NSA illegally spy on Americans MBL87560SEC Off-Topic 2 01-31-2006 10:25 PM
    NYT: NSA Spying Broader Than Bush Admitted firstmb Off-Topic 1 12-23-2005 11:55 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome