Posted on 02/04/2017 6:16:36 AM PST by ColdOne
5) He sees court system as means to help people It was also during his confirmation hearing that Robart spoke about using the courts to help people who felt disenfranchised. "I was introduced to people who in many times felt that the legal system was stacked against them or was unfair," he said. "And one of the things, I think, that my time there helped accomplish was to show them that the legal system was set up for their benefit and that it could be, if properly used, an opportunity for them to seek redress if they had been wronged." Robart added that he would treat everyone in his courtroom with "dignity and respect." "Working with people who have an immediate need and an immediate problem that you are able to help with is the most satisfying aspect of the practice of law. I think in terms of -- if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed by the Senate, I will take that experience to the courtroom with me, recognize that you need to treat everyone with dignity and with respect, and to engage them so that when they leave the courtroom they feel like they had a fair trial."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Which is typical so-called Conservative judges like John Roberts can latter bite you like the snakes that they truly are
Looking to make a name for himself...
Why does the US need and pay for a President and Congress when there are Federal Judges ?
“A Bush appointed judge.”
Not only is he Bush appointed, but, as shown by this article, his background ws aloaded with flashing red lights and sirens showing he was a totally chimped out,, bat shit crazy Marxist that Obola would have loved to appoint. Once again, my already low view of W drops another few notches.
Is this the same creepy judge that said that police are killing innocent black people?
Yes.
Needs to be choked with that ridiculous tie
Good ... then you’ll lead the effort against the IRS and it’s illegal confiscatory practices, right ?
Bush-43 has to be the dumbest president in 100 years. A nice guy, someone to have a beer with, but dumb as a doorknob.
He sure sounds leftist but I wonder if his social justice passion is fueled by his own religion. Is he a fellow Methodist like Bush and Hillary? Bush and Hillary are not the same brand of Methodist but there seems to always be strong affiliation with people in same denomination. Just wondering. Plus a mainline denomination of any type is going to produce this type of feel good action that they allow to supersede the law.
Under the Constitution, federal judges have life tenure, and can be removed only through impeachment.
I read Clinton removed many judges when taking office so he could appoint new judges.
No, that was the U.S. Attorneys (federal prosecutors). They are employees of the Justice Department and may be removed by the President at any time.
Bush's policy of "reaching out" to the opposition again demonstrates his unfortunate naivete.
Robart may not have been a long-haired barefoot Bolshevik when Bush appointed him, but he sure sounds well left of center.
+1
Bush-43 has to be the dumbest president in 100 years. A nice guy, someone to have a beer with, but dumb as a doorknob.
Please. No way can W replace Jimmah as the dumbest President ever. Maybe the dumbest Republican President, but not the dumbest over-all President. That’s not being fair to ex-President Carter!
I actually shook his hand just after he was elected in 2000, in a speech he gave in Portland, OR. He gave a very likable speech, and the selected audience of several hundred people loudly cheered and applauded. But you got him figured correctly...Naive!
Agree!
Jimmah was an engineer by education...so not dumb, since I am one too haha, but just a bleeding heart socialist democrat.
The judge, by his own words, condemns himself as a jurist, showing he is more a politician that wants to use the courts as his political office, instead of getting elected to one.
The court is not about “helping people”, it is there to serve the law, whether the law helps someone or does not help someone. The law might be against you. It is not for the court to “defend” you AGAINST the law (lest there is a Constitutional rights issue), which is not the case with the EO on immigration restrictions.
Yeppers. Metro-sexual liberal activist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.