Judge Jones seems to be seeing the "bogey man" here. In fact, the media blows up the comments of "terrorists" like Ann Coulter and Phyllis Schlafly to link them to "threats" against judges. The worst part of the story is when they bring in the judge's family murdered in Chicago last year. That was about a personal matter, nothing social or political.
If Judge Jones feels threatened or was threatened, why haven't we heard about arrests? Isn't that a crime? Or was this the work of liberal trolls who stopped short of a crime or just some people P.O.'ed with bad decisions like this one.
I think his decision stank and citing a precedent doesn't make it right. Would Judge Jones have upheld the "Plessy vs. Ferguson" precedent or perhaps the "Dred Scott" precedent? The liberal federal judges have no problem killing the Pledge of Allegiance or ruling for terror suspects at Gitmo.
Judge Jones is a protege of the "moderate" Tom Ridge. (Who raised taxes and increased spending, besides being pro abortion and claiming to be a "fiscal conservative". He even cut a deal giving the legislature automatic cost of living raises every year.) And President Bush and his buddy Ridge naturally worked out this post for Ridge's man.
I sure hope Alito and Roberts vote the right way on Roe vs. Wade or else the GOP could feel some heat.
But the disregard of precedent is one of the defining characteristics of an activist judge! Creationists can't denounce him as an activist while howling about his adhering too closely to precedent.
May I assume you are on the record with similar views about the Craig Kilborn "snipers wanted" incident?
His decision was entirely correct.
and citing a precedent doesn't make it right.
No, what makes it right is the fact that it was the correct decision based on the evidence which was presented before the court.