[redpill] For anyone that cares how the "Game" of higher court cases work, sometimes you need a judge to write the garbage ruling based of the garbage precident/case law which was brought before the court as argued by the "National funded lawyers". This garbage opinion, is what then goes to the next level on appeal, so then a "good" new ruling can be handed down as overturning that old garbage case law.
So even though in a perfect world, judges would be following the Constitution, well because of the EVIL MARXIST
means courts aren't supposed to rule on "Constitutionality" if they can avoid it. This is a major reason why the unconstitutional crud has built up over the last 90 years.
So moral of the story, don't always assume a "judges" opinion, his the judges actual opinion as it should be in a perfect world. Nearly all law students are taught, most lawyers practice, and nearly all sitting judges play this bureaucratic swamp game, rather than buck the system (other wise it means never getting promoted, and relegated to like the equivalent of traffic court, of still on the bench). Think in terms of what the GOP did to Ron Paul, or what the senate does to Rand; if you start going all "reading the Constitution" in your rulings and opinions.
[redpill] For anyone that cares how the "Game" of higher court cases work, sometimes you need a judge to write the garbage ruling based of the garbage precident/case law which was brought before the court as argued by the "National funded lawyers". This garbage opinion, is what then goes to the next level on appeal, so then a "good" new ruling can be handed down as overturning that old garbage case law.
So even though in a perfect world, judges would be following the Constitution, well because of the EVIL MARXIST
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashwander_rules
means courts aren't supposed to rule on "Constitutionality" if they can avoid it. This is a major reason why the unconstitutional crud has built up over the last 90 years.
So moral of the story, don't always assume a "judges" opinion, his the judges actual opinion as it should be in a perfect world. Nearly all law students are taught, most lawyers practice, and nearly all sitting judges play this bureaucratic swamp game, rather than buck the system (other wise it means never getting promoted, and relegated to like the equivalent of traffic court, of still on the bench). Think in terms of what the GOP did to Ron Paul, or what the senate does to Rand; if you start going all "reading the Constitution" in your rulings and opinions.