For sure, but I think your comparison of the sports official and a judge is interesting. If I am a sports official and I allow my biases for or against a certain team/coach/player to affect my abilities to call games, I get fired. Most rules in sports are clear. Sports officials have to objectively apply those rules. If I allow my biases to affect my efforts as a judge, I keep my job. The constitution in America is clear. Judges have a responsibility to objectively apply those rules.

The most well known example of this is the difference in rulings between Plessy v Ferguson and Brown v Board of Education. Which one is right? They can't both be right. In my opinion, the judges that ruled on the Plessy case were twisting the constitution to fit the culture of the time. This is just wrong and this is the problem that arises when judges rule biasedly to support whichever activist cause they support at the time.

I agree with you. I am an official in basketball. But sometimes if I wonder if subconsciously I do things that are not 100% unbiased. I generally don't care who wins or loses and want to let the kids plays but certain coaches and fans can get on your nerves.

Oh and the Plessy case is famous. Bad bad bad bad call.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/1/2019 9:48:00 AM (view original):
Just for some clarity and constitutional insight, your 1st amendment rights do not extend to this thread. This is an absolute monarchy. If you post useless crap, I will redline it. Please keep your posts intellectual in nature.

Exceptions to rule include, but are not limited to, Taint updating on sports betting in vegas. This is because I like Taint and am willing to make exceptions for him.

My liège.

Yes, I am not saying that I want robots as judges. Judges are allowed to be human and make mistakes. It becomes an issue when there biases are consistently evident. As with sports officials, they are allowed to miss a call every now and then. They are not going to be out of work for this. If they are consistently missing, they lose their jobs.

GoMiami for your allegiance I am naming you Duke of Hoops Dynasty and giving you all land in World Naismith.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/1/2019 8:01:00 AM (view original):
When it comes to the role of judges in our country, I am an originalist. To be more specific, I am a textualist. When you have judges that try to change the meaning of the author's words to "better suit the time period", you now have a judicial branch that tries to legislate. This is very dangerous for the future of our country. Our government was set up very specifically by our founders to create a balance of power. We have a legislation to create new laws that are appropriate for the culture of the day. It is our judges responsibility to interpret law as it was written.

I hope you include the citizens united decision in your scorn for activist judges.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/1/2019 10:16:00 AM (view original):
GoMiami for your allegiance I am naming you Duke of Hoops Dynasty and giving you all land in World Naismith.

Thank you very much for your generosity.

To be clear, I am fluent in French. Liege means lord or king. Liège (what I actually wrote) means cork.

I wish we had a topic of sanctuary cities and how judges have totally allowed them to ruin our country.

We will do that tomorrow for you.

Posted by cccp1014 on 2/1/2019 11:07:00 AM (view original):
I wish we had a topic of sanctuary cities and how judges have totally allowed them to ruin our country.

LOL sanctuary cities haven't ruined anything.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/1/2019 9:38:00 AM (view original):
Yes, I think judges trying to legislate from the bench is a much bigger threat to our country's preservation than anything Trump has done. It is much easier the hold the president accountable than it is the judicial branch. If you think Trump is damaging to our nation's integrity. you can vote him out. The president cannot legislate. He does have limited executive power within the bounds of our laws and constitution, but if he oversteps his authority we have judges to stop him.

so, you are saying a Judge should not overturn Roe vs wade because it has already been decided? Or does it only work if they are "legislating" a decision you are not in favor of?
I don't have a strong opinion on this one either. Of course judges (and sports officials) are paid to not show biases, but they are human, and they will show some bias. If they are good at their job, they won't let their biases affect their judgements very much, but it is human nature that their biases will affect some of their decisions.

Posted by cccp1014 on 2/1/2019 9:52:00 AM (view original):
Taint sucks. LOL.

I do agree that many judges are just bad. I have sat on two juries and I thought the judge in one was excellent, she was A+. In the 2nd one, it was a grumpy old loser. He was bad. Judges aren't God.

Its not just judges. There are bad apples in every walk of life and every profession. Also, what you call bad, someone else may think is wonderful. It's all a matter of personal opinion. Well, not all. I'm sure there are some judges everyone would agree are bad or good.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 2/1/2019 10:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/1/2019 10:16:00 AM (view original):
GoMiami for your allegiance I am naming you Duke of Hoops Dynasty and giving you all land in World Naismith.

Thank you very much for your generosity.

To be clear, I am fluent in French. Liege means lord or king. Liège (what I actually wrote) means cork.

put a cork in it!

Posted by bad_luck on 2/1/2019 11:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 2/1/2019 11:07:00 AM (view original):
I wish we had a topic of sanctuary cities and how judges have totally allowed them to ruin our country.

LOL sanctuary cities haven't ruined anything.

see? just what I was saying. CCCP thinks sanctuary cities have ruined America. BL thinks they are great. It all depends on your biases!