Obama disregards judicial oath

[Yurt]

Obama's record as a senator does not indicate he has a listening heart on judicial selections. He was not one of the bipartisan "Gang of 14" senators who, in 2005, brokered a compromise to avoid filibusters for votes on President Bush's court nominees. He has also made clear that he wants courts to use the Constitution for social policy. Judges, he said, must have "the heart, the empathy ... to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old."

While such empathy is necessary for presidents or legislators, it runs counter to the judicial oath. Judges must "administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich." And a Rasmussen poll last month found that nearly two-thirds of Americans say court rulings should be based on what is written in the Constitution. Only 35 percent believe Obama agrees with them on that.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20090218/cm_csm/ejudges

and this guy was head of law review??? scary, this guy is a revolutionary and people just don't see it. then again, the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist....

[DannyR]

While such empathy is necessary for presidents or legislators, it runs counter to the judicial oath. I don't see it as being counter or contradictory at al. One can administer law fairly for both rich and poor, while still understanding the plight the poor come from.

Most judges are rather well off and thus have a good understanding of how the upper class live. Since they have such an understanding, isn't this also counter to the judicial oath? Do you really expect me to believe that one can be rich and judge fairly, but understanding what its like to be poor makes one a bad judge? :laugh2:


Only 35 percent believe Obama agrees with them on that.This illustrates my problem with news today. Who cares what people believe Obama believes. Article should have posted what Obama's actual stated stance is!


the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist....

That devil, he's a hell of a guy!

[Yurt]

what part of: without respect to persons.... do you not understand? obama is in fact saying we must administer the law WITH respect to persons.

quite the opposite of the oath

[DannyR]

what part of: without respect to persons.... do you not understand? obama is in fact saying we must administer the law WITH respect to persons.

quite the opposite of the oathObama is saying no such thing. The oath says that their judgments must be made without respect to rich or poor, not that the judges must not be educated about life. There is a difference, and you seem to be refusing to see it.

A judge should obtain all the information they can about a case before ruling on that judgment. Knowing how poor people live only makes one a better judge, as you have more facts at your disposal. It doesn't mean you will render a biased judgment. More knowledge doesn't make one biased!

These judges ALREADY understand what its like to be well off and probably upper class (every judge I know at least gets paid quite well). Are you claiming they are already unable to render an unbiased decision because of this knowledge, because you seem to be claiming that knowing what its like to be poor makes one unable to be a proper judge!

[Yurt]

Obama is saying no such thing. The oath says that their judgments must be made without respect to rich or poor, not that the judges must not be educated about life. There is a difference, and you seem to be refusing to see it.

A judge should obtain all the information they can about a case before ruling on that judgment. Knowing how poor people live only makes one a better judge, as you have more facts at your disposal. It doesn't mean you will render a biased judgment. More knowledge doesn't make one biased!

These judges ALREADY understand what its like to be well off and probably upper class (every judge I know at least gets paid quite well). Are you claiming they are already unable to render an unbiased decision because of this knowledge, because you seem to be claiming that knowing what its like to be poor makes one unable to be a proper judge!

dude...


Judges, he said, must have "the heart, the empathy ... to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old."

While such empathy is necessary for presidents or legislators, it runs counter to the judicial oath. Judges must "administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich."

you are NOT to consider their race, sexual orientation etc...what do you NOT understand about


administer justice without respect to persons

obama is saying the exact opposite, he wants judges to consider the persons race, age, sexual orientation...

and you think you are high and mighty showing others are idiots...it is painfully obvious yet you somehow think obama's clear words and the clear words of the judicial oath mean something else. you're flat wrong on this. justice is supposed to be blind to such things, yet you somehow think just because someone is old, white and wealthy that they always administer justice that way....wrong...they are supposed to administer WITHOUT respect to persons, not like obama is suggesting.

[DannyR]

You can keep reposting the same info over and over again. Point out exactly where Obama says he wants them to actually render verdicts based on race, poverty etc. He didn't.

Once again, more knowledge does not make one biased!


yet you somehow think just because someone is old, white and wealthy that they always administer justice that wayUm, no, I asked if YOU thought because someone was old, white and wealthy they administered justice that way, because you seem to be saying that someone who is poor, black or gay can't!


and you think you are high and mighty showing others are idiots

I won't say you're an idiot. You seem to take a perverse delight in interpreting someone's words only the way you want them to mean, intentionally ignoring the obvious meaning behind them or the context. That takes some clever thinking.

[Yurt]

You can keep reposting the same info over and over again. Point out exactly where Obama says he wants them to actually render verdicts based on race, poverty etc. He didn't.

Once again, more knowledge does not make one biased!

Um, no, I asked if YOU thought because someone was old, white and wealthy they administered justice that way, because you seem to be saying that someone who is poor, black or gay can't!



I won't say you're an idiot. You seem to take a perverse delight in interpreting someone's words only the way you want them to mean, intentionally ignoring the obvious meaning behind them or the context. That takes some clever thinking.

o rly? even the author of the article i published said obama's words contradict the oath. it is you who believes your interpretation of the oath and his words is correct.

you're way off base on what i am saying and what obama is saying. as i mentioned before, obama should also know about lady justice, obviously you don't....


As stated above, Lady Justice is often depicted wearing a blindfold. This is done in order to indicate that justice is (or should be) meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of the identity, power, or weakness: blind justice and blind impartiality.

ergo, obama is wrong that judges should consider or administer justice becaus someone is african american. that is abosolutely against the judicial oath....perhaps you think that judges should consider the crimes differently, thus administer justice differently, based ont he color of one's skin.

[DannyR]

even the author of the article i published said obama's words contradict the oath.Um, my original point was arguing that his interpretation was wrong. No need to remind me what the author said!

His opinion, like yours, is wrong here. You are confusing education about race, gays, poverty, lifestyles with an ability to render fair and unbiased judgments. Once again, the two are not incompatible! Education does not make one biased!


obama is wrong that judges should consider or administer justice becaus someone is african americanAnd again, he never said any such thing. He said his judges should understand what its like themselves. Thats not the same as telling them they should rule based on race/poverty/etc

Once again, answer my question: Do you believe a judge who understand wealth and power is inherently biased? Because you keep arguing that understanding poverty or race makes one so!


regardless of the identityThis isn't about the identity of the person before the judge, but the judge's own life experiences and education. He doesn't want just old white rich men on his bench, but someone with real life experiences.

[Yurt]

since you support obama's view you're a racist, it shouldn't matter if they white or old or whatever....

without respect to persons

[DannyR]

since you support obama's view you're a racistI'm a racist because I think a judge should be educated?! :laugh2:

And again you feel the need to resort to name calling. Always know I've won an argument when the other has to start with the insults.


it shouldn't matter if they white or old or whatever..

Then why do you keep implying that a poor/black/gay person must be biased?


without respect to personseh? Repeating once again since you keep missing it. Nobody is asking them to judge unfairly.

[Yurt]

calling you a racist is not name calling, it is a fact. you believe judges should administer justice on the basis of skin color, that is racist.

justice is NOT to consider the person, you and obama think justice should consider whether the person is african american, that is racist and has nothing to do with administering justice.

too bad you feel that your views are an insult, perhaps you should reconsider your views if you feel they are insulting.

[DannyR]

you believe judges should administer justice on the basis of skin color, that is racist. I do eh? :laugh2: Boy, you really like reading things into what people actually post that aren't there. I have been pretty clear, specifically saying judges aren't being asked to be biased, but you think I am saying otherwise.


you and obama think justice should consider whether the person is african american:lol: Again you reading something that was never said.