Legislator, Executive, Judge

Legislator, Executive, Judge
President Obama has chosen a judge from the 2nd Federal District, Sonia Sotomayor, as his nominee for the United States Supreme Court.  It’s both a political choice and an ideological choice.  The political reason for choosing Judge Sotomayor is that she is a woman and she is Hispanic.  The ideological reason is that Sonia Sotomayor is a far left ideologue that is in tune with the President and the far left wing agenda of the Democratic Party.

Barack Obama is President and he can choose whomever he wants.  Before the current political age in which we now live, virtually all Presidential appointees were approved by the Senate unless they were found to have engaged in criminal behavior, were of bad character, or simply unfit for office.  We have had, as a historical note, judges on the US Supreme Court who were not attorneys.

The problem with Judge Sotomayor is that she does not envision her role as a judge to be limited to ruling exclusively on the basis of the US Constitution.  Before a group of Duke University Law School students, she confided that “sometimes we make policy.”

The role of a legislator is to make laws that are consistent with the Constitution—the highest law of the land.  The role of the Chief Executive, the President, is to execute those laws and to comply with the Constitution.  The role of a judge is to rule on matters before it and to determine which side of the case is consistent with the US Constitution. 

The legislators’ role is not to execute or judge.  The Chief Executive’s role is not to legislate or judge.  The judges’ role is not to legislate or execute.

It’s pretty simple and straightforward.

A good judge is one who is knowledgeable in regard to the US Constitution and is cognizant of previous rulings on similar matters; however, the Constitution of the United States is to take precedence over all.

A judge is not to read something into the law that was not put there by a legislator or the writers of the Constitution.  He or she may not (under the oath with which they were sworn in) rely on their own opinions or any other source (such as foreign law).

In theory, it shouldn’t make any difference whether you are a liberal or a conservative.  All you need is knowledge, a keen intellect, good research, and integrity.  The result should be the same.  Sadly, and dangerously, our judicial system has been seriously corrupted by individuals who do not take their oath to uphold the US Constitution seriously, nor do they limit themselves to understanding what the intent of the legislator or writers of the Constitution intended. 

Their role is not to decide if laws are just, fair, or result in good or bad consequences.  Justice is to be as blind as the Lady of Justice that holds the scales in her hands.  They are not to favor rich over poor, the weak over the powerful, or even the good over the bad.  Their role is solely to rule on the basis of the law and the US Constitution.

Any judge, liberal, conservative, or moderate should be rejected if they do not accept this role and limit themselves to following these simple Constitutional guidelines. 

A judge’s role is no different than an umpire at a baseball game.  He must make the players, the managers and the coaches follow the rules.  Yes, sometimes judges and umpires make honest mistakes, but any umpire who intentionally “throws” a game is banished from baseball and lives out the rest of his life in shame.  Any judge who knowingly strays from the law because he is sympathetic with one party’s plight over another should similarly be banished in shame from public view.

If freedom is to survive, legislators need to legislate, the Chief Executive needs to execute, and our judges need to judge solely on the basis of the US Constitution.