This is a terrible reflection on justice

[kiryan]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 04018.html

Its a story on the Arizona Immigration law and the 3 judge appeals court reviewing it. They've pegged one judge in favor of upholding, one is Democrat and it is suggested they will vote against and the third who has a conservative voting record could go either way and may vote against because he is hispanic.

It's not so much the actual news in this article that deeply offends my sensibilities, but the suggestion that any of these judges will sympathize or vote differently in this case based on their race / cultural heritage. It is sad when we accept these kinds of statements as valid analysis or when we can't trust our judges, our justice system, to evaluate cases based on teh merit of the law rather than the color of your skin.

"But Bea and Paez are Hispanic, and it is Hispanics who are most upset about the Arizona law. "Perhaps this is one area where Bea might not vote as a so-called conservative because he himself is an immigrant,'' said Arthur Hellman, a University of Pittsburgh law professor and an expert on the 9th Circuit. "

[Teflor Lyorian]

Well, they will make their case with some basis in the law, but how they construct their arguments is personal. Judges are there for their opinions, after all, and not for mathematic calculations.

[kiryan]

Judges are not there for their opinions as it relates to their cultural heritage, gender, race, political or socioeconomic status. Judges' opinions are limited to their legal interpretation of law with the Constitution being the source of truth.

They may be human, but their job is to cast aside their human side and rule on law. This is exactly why I object, people should not believe or get in the habit of thinking that there should be a humanistic component of judging. Obama's Supreme court choices were pitched in this light... that a diversity of experiences makes for a better court... maybe a diversity of legal experiences, but certainly not a diversity in life experiences.

[Teflor Lyorian]

Very much so, they must base their arguments soundly upon the law, any other judge above them will tear them apart if it is not well grounded.

But my original point relates to HOW they construct their grounded opinion. When you have 30 doors to start to walk through, you inevitably have to pick a door. If I smell good Chinese food behind one of them - that's my door.