|
Mojo, there is nothing wrong with asking for judicial philosophy in terms of "how do you approach deciding cases? what sources do you use, what sorts of things do you find persuasive?" That's perfectly ok; we wouldn't want a justice who consults a psychic, right? But it's wildly improper to ask how someone would rule on a case that hasn't even come before them yet. For one thing, it's massively unfair to the particular litigants, who are entitled to an impartial judge who hasn't already publicly declared how they would rule. But it's also impossible to answer these questions in the abstract because you just don't know what the facts will be of the particular case that ends up coming to the court. Lincoln had the best comment on this; I wish I could remember it, but it went something like "if a judge told us in advance how he would rule we should despise him."
|