Streams

Ousting Controversial Judges

Friday, November 05, 2010

Richard Hasen, law professor at Loyola Law School and author of the "Election Law Blog", discusses the ousting of three controversial judges who ruled in favor of gay marriage in Iowa and what it signals to other judges nationwide.

Guests:

Richard Hasen

The Morning Brief

Enter your email address and we’ll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.

Comments [5]

JM

The Constitution says a lot of vague stuff and doesn't flesh out the details:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

What the hell is *that* supposed to mean?

Nov. 05 2010 10:20 AM
Cheryl from Staten Island

We do not license physicians because they tell us what we want to hear or only give us treatments that are pleasant and good-tasting. Patients with those sorts of "doctors" are soon beyond the help of medicine. Likewise Justices should NOT be subject to popular election. We do not need judges who give us what today's popular wants and demands are. We need judges who base their decisions on law, justice, a living Constitution, and the common good of all. We don't have to like it, but we might wind up beyond help if we judge by what feels good now.

Nov. 05 2010 10:20 AM
Eric K from Brooklyn

Judges should not be elected officials. They do not answer to the people. They answer to the Constitution. The Constitution trumps the whims of the people.

If we truly want to live in a representative, indirect democracy, we would not elect judges - electing judges is just another instrument of mobocracy.

Nov. 05 2010 10:18 AM
Cherise from Garden City

I like this host! She actually asks tough questions like they do on BBC.

Nov. 05 2010 10:15 AM
JM, Esq. from Midtown

As an attorney, I know that the law doesn't always give black-and-white answers. High court judges have enormous latitude in interpreting the law, and clever lawyers can use the same cases and statutes to argue for opposite rulings. We would be naive to assume that personal ideology never plays a role in judicial decisions

Nov. 05 2010 10:12 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.