Do we really want judges making law from the bench based on their own beliefs of how things should be? Do we really want to obfuscate the legislative process by having unelected jurists – a party of one – make our laws? President Obama has stated, as recently as yesterday, that he wants jurists who render decisions based solely on the law and to look at the existing law and U.S. Constitution for their decisions.
If he really believes this than why did he nominate Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court? Once again we have to watch both hands when he speaks. He appears to be shaking your hand with his right hand and quietly picking your pocket with his left hand. I say this because Sonia Sotomayer is clearly a jurist who openly brags about making policy from the bench. She has laughingly talked about legislating from the bench.
We do not need to look at her prior decisions, when she has openly, and I might add arrogantly, admitted legislating or making policy from the appellate bench. A recent YouTube clip says it all! Yet she is nominated for the highest court in the land, and is young enough, that if affirmed, will serve for the next thirty years. Is this what was intended by checks and balances? If you don’t believe me and you have not seen the clip click here, remember she is the one speaking to law students. She is explaining where they might best pursue a law career. She is suggesting appellate court experience, since that is where policy is made.
If we continue to allow jurists to make decision on how they wish the law to be and not how it stands as written, an enterprising defense attorney will, sooner or later, use the “I disagree with the law as written and I feel it should be different, just as Justice so and so does on a regular basis” defense.
Had enough yet? If you believe in the rule of law and not law of the judge, you may want to get on the phone with your Senators and tell them to keep looking for a balanced jurist.