Post by sclcookie on May 31, 2006 2:35:30 GMT -5
State appeals courts
In years past, voters have been asked to choose state appeals judges with little information and little to distinguish one candidate from another. Fortunately - or unfortunately, depending on your perspective - that's not the case this year.
Especially in 4 of 5 Supreme Court races, Republican primary voters have a clear choice to make. They can elect judges who will uphold the rule of law and who respect our system of justice. Or they can elect judges who don't consider themselves bound by the rule of law and who don't respect our system of justice.
Associate Justice Tom Parker is seeking the court's chief justice job on a platform that says it's OK for judges to pick and choose which legal precedents they will follow. For example, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to execute defendants for crimes they committed below the age of 18, Parker claimed Alabama's Supreme Court justices could have simply refused to abide by the order.
In other words, Parker thinks a court order is not mandatory, and one man's opinion can trump it. Never mind this is the epitome of judicial activism, which Parker claims to hate. And never mind the logical extreme of Parker's position is anarchy.
Worse, he has enlisted 3 allies who share his awful views and are challenging other justices on the court.
Thankfully, Republican voters have far better alternatives for a court that decides issues ranging from the death penalty to divorce. 5 Supreme Court seats are up for election, and there are 4 contested primaries in lower appeals court races.
In years past, voters have been asked to choose state appeals judges with little information and little to distinguish one candidate from another. Fortunately - or unfortunately, depending on your perspective - that's not the case this year.
Especially in 4 of 5 Supreme Court races, Republican primary voters have a clear choice to make. They can elect judges who will uphold the rule of law and who respect our system of justice. Or they can elect judges who don't consider themselves bound by the rule of law and who don't respect our system of justice.
Associate Justice Tom Parker is seeking the court's chief justice job on a platform that says it's OK for judges to pick and choose which legal precedents they will follow. For example, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to execute defendants for crimes they committed below the age of 18, Parker claimed Alabama's Supreme Court justices could have simply refused to abide by the order.
In other words, Parker thinks a court order is not mandatory, and one man's opinion can trump it. Never mind this is the epitome of judicial activism, which Parker claims to hate. And never mind the logical extreme of Parker's position is anarchy.
Worse, he has enlisted 3 allies who share his awful views and are challenging other justices on the court.
Thankfully, Republican voters have far better alternatives for a court that decides issues ranging from the death penalty to divorce. 5 Supreme Court seats are up for election, and there are 4 contested primaries in lower appeals court races.