Apparently, there's no shortage of radical leftwing lawyers trying to become judges, logically for the purpose of helping to impose radical leftwing ideology on the people, regardless of what the Constitution says. Sure, this story focusses on Idaho, but I have a hunch that if judicial applicants everywhere were asked to endorse everything in the Constitution of their respective jurisdiction, they'd frequently refuse, knowing that they must leave the door open for the illegal, unconstitutional judicial activism they obviously have planned for their time on the bench.
None of the 19 candidates currently seeking appointment to fill a vacancy in the Idaho Supreme Court was willing to confirm support for a series of statements drawn directly from the state's constitution, according to the Idaho Values Alliance.
That's right: They were presented with statements made by the state Constitution itself and they refused to accept these statements, meaning that they reject the Constitution or are so arrogant as to deem they may cherry-pick it however they please.
Uncceptable. A judge is an employee of the people and must uphold the Constitution without exception for their personal views or the views of any special interest groups they may favor over the general population. If a person cannot accept and scrupulously obey the Constitution, then such a person has no business whatsoever becoming or remaining a judge. The people want their judges to be as scrupulous as possible and never corrupt, never activist. Otherwise, the people will not have any faith whatsoever in the judges, nor in the courts. And this is an unacceptable situation to be in.
One of the statements (read the whole article to learn about other statements they incredibly rejected) to which not a single applicant responded was:
Article 1, Section 1, states: "All men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are enjoying and defending life and liberty…"
They didn't confirm support for this statement of the Constitution. Scary. They aren't fit to judge anyone!
I guess they deemed it all "politically incorrect" or "potentially offensive to so-and-so".
"One possibility is that the candidates didn't even recognize that these statements come word-for-word from the state constitution, which is pretty alarming," said Bryan Fischer, the executive director of the alliance.
"The second possibility is that they did recognize them as coming from the constitution, but weren't willing to let the public know whether they agreed with it. That's even worse," he said.
How can Idahoans trust any of these people? Can they afford to just let these mysterious figures proceed to deem that which shall and shall not be, notwithstanding what the state Constitution says?
I suppose that if the state Constitution was comprised of nothing but common leftwing cliches, such as relating to sexual extremism, submission to Muslim supremacists, taking guns away from the people, crushing the rights of non-Islamic religious peoples, having a communistic (as Hillary Clinton wants there to be) medical system, etc... the judges would be all too happy to indicate unequivocal support for such leftwing dogmae!
How can the reasonable person possibly trust judges, knowing that the judges can and frequently will make illegal, unconstitutional rulings based on nothing but their own ideology, most frequently being a radical leftwing one?
Commentor "BB-Idaho", what do you think of that? Does this not concern you in the least?
