Schumer admits to politicizing the Judiciary

civilwarbuff said:

Go re-read the OP then......

Click to expand...

I will react to Schumer's actions:
Thank you, Senator!
You are protecting our threatened Democracy!
God bless you, society's protector and defender.
Thank you.

civilwarbuff said:

I believe I have advocated at least a few times on other threads about judges needing to be apolitical. They can hold political opinions they just need to be able to separate those from constitutional issues that come before them. Personal likes/dislikes/grudges need to be set aside or they should at least have the integrity to recuse themselves. Too many are unable or unwilling to do so.

Click to expand...

Do you have any actual evidence that any of the judges Schumer was referring to are unable to separate their personal opinions from constitutional issues? Or do you simply assume that someone who holds progressive opinions is unable to do so, while those who hold conservative opinions are?

civilwarbuff said:

But that is what this thread is about.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but the point I made was about the opinions of judges, which is what Schumer was talking about. It directly relates to the point being raised in the OP.

civilwarbuff said:

As I have pointed out more than once Chuck actually BRAGGED about appointing liberal judges.

Click to expand...

So? Conservatives can brag about appointing conservative judges if they want to as well. What's wrong with that?

If you dislike politicians who brag....well, I could point to the Oval Office, but that is definitely off topic here.

civilwarbuff said:

Please stop asking that question; it has been answered.

Click to expand...

It has? I must have missed it. Earlier in this post, you said that judges can hold political opinions, but you seem to have a problem with Schumer preferring judges whose opinions coincide with his own, much as GOP politicians prefer those who agree with theirs. I'm still unclear on whether or not that is wrong now. It hasn't been up to this point.

-- A2SG, maybe you could point to the post where the question was actually answered....

civilwarbuff said:

I won't bother to list them here because they are not reported on your leftist media news. You would simply deny them.....like everything else it seems.

Click to expand...

Humor them. Humor me. Who are these judges?

civilwarbuff said:

So, it appears you only get leftist media sources also....done wasting my time.

Click to expand...

LOL. Down goes Frazier!

civilwarbuff said:

I won't bother to list them here because they are not reported on your leftist media news. You would simply deny them.....like everything else it seems.

Click to expand...

Ah, refusing to document your claims, with a dollop of ad hominem. Nice.

But, if you actually had evidence that any of the judges Schumer praised were unable to separate their personal opinions from constitutional issues, you don't need to rely on "leftist media" to report it. Surely, if you had that evidence, you could present it directly.

I can only assume by your not presenting it that you don't actually have any. But feel free to prove me wrong at any point.

civilwarbuff said:

But again (sigh) this is not about the opinions of judges; it is about Chuck Schumer and his statement.

Click to expand...

And what was his statement about, again? Right...the progressive political opinions of judges, and how he likes when they have them. From that, you assume these judges are unable to separate their personal opinions from constitutional issues, but haven't provided any evidence that any of these judges have actually done that.

That was my point. Sorry you missed it.

civilwarbuff said:

I am getting seriously tired responding you your same comments over and over.

Click to expand...

If I keep asking the same questions over and over again, it's because the questions are not being answered. Look above for the one about actual evidence, which you say you won't "bother" to list, which leaves the impression you do have evidence, but are choosing not to provide it.

But, you're always free to dispel that impression with the actual evidence. Your call, dude.

civilwarbuff said:

Another repeat of such and we are done....up to you.

Click to expand...

Nope, up to you. I respond to your posts how I choose to, you are free to choose not to respond to mine.

civilwarbuff said:

BECAUSE IT IS A STUPID, IGNORANT THING TO SAY AND DO!!!!!!!!!!
Is that clear enough?

Click to expand...

Sure. I look forward to your complaints the next time Trump or the Senate appoints a judge who holds conservative opinions and praises that judge for those views.

civilwarbuff said:

You most certainly did.....on more than one occasion.....

Click to expand...

So show me what I missed.

-- A2SG, this post was the first time you called praising a judge for their conservative views on the law as "stupid" and "ignorant," you hadn't spelled that out before....

civilwarbuff said:

No, just tired of your refusal to educate yourself.....not my job.

Click to expand...

I have no problem educating myself. And I've checked...if any of the judges that Schumer has bragged about were unable to separate their personal opinions from constitutional issues, I've seen no evidence of it. You seem to be implying that they are unable to unable to separate their personal opinions from constitutional issues, and I'm simply asking for the evidence you seem to have, that I haven't been able to find.

If you're unable to do that, I can only conclude that you're making baseless assumptions, and nothing more. But you are, of course, always free to prove me wrong.

But, it seems to me that many Republicans view any ruling that goes against Donald Trump as an inability to separate the judge's personal opinions from constitutional issues, and don't seem to even care what those constitutional issues might be. I'm not saying that's you, but it seems a very prevalent view in Congress, to the point where the Speaker of the House has suggested, perhaps facetiously, that he may potentially defund, restructure or eliminate the US federal court system. “We do have the authority over the federal courts, as you know. We can eliminate an entire district court,” Johnson said.

I'm curious, do you agree with Johnson on this?

civilwarbuff said:

They have been answered. If you don't want to look not my problem.

Click to expand...

I have looked. Multiple times. I haven't found them. But feel free to point them out, if you have.

civilwarbuff said:

If they do it the way Schumer did I will criticize them the same way.

Click to expand...

Have you done that before, when the GOP bragged about having a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court? I do seem to recall hearing a lot about that a while back, around when Roe v Wade was overturned.

civilwarbuff said:

I am not like leftists who only think it is wrong when the opposition does it.
I'm an equal opportunity critic.

Click to expand...

Cool. I look forward to your objections.

But, I am curious....in the article I cited earlier about Speaker Johnson, Senator Josh Hawley said that, while he disagreed with eliminating federal courts, “My view is, I’d like to get more Republican judges on the bench.” How do you feel about this? Is that not showing a preference for opinions he agrees with? He made no mention of any potential jurist's legal experience with constitutional issues, after all.

civilwarbuff said:

Not my job to do your work for you. Take responsibility for your own edification.

Click to expand...

I do. All the time.

-- A2SG, but I simply can't find evidence for what you're implying, so I asked for your evidence....if you have none, then you can simply admit that....