Posted on 05/15/2014 11:20:26 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
Law schools teach this principle, more or less. That some cases are decided on an “outcome” basis. Pick the outcome, then write the decision. The key to winning is to present an appealing argument to the decider, generally something that will make the decider look good. The argument need not be logical, and there are enough decisions on the books that cases can be cited for absolutely ANY proposition. There is no requirement to cite a case accurately for what it stands for, cherry picking language is encouraged and practiced. All the courts cheat this way. It’s quite clear when one actually studies the cases cited as precedents, and what they are “deemed” to stand for. Quite often, 180 degrees opposed. SCOTUS does that too.
Laws that blatantly infringe a Right that is explicitly not to be infringed?
‘Judges’ like this should face treason charges and potential execution.
Judges stopped being jurists to become politicians a long time ago.
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.