woodguru

She has taken positions with and for highly polarized christian advocacy groups that are disturbing, and defining why comes down to another premise she has written and spoken about... bringing christian values to the judiciary. That is not okay when a hardcore right leaning religious orientation would easily settle cases on a******n using religious beliefs instead of what the constitution says.

An a******n case seen at a lower court level is about the legality of what a state has done that has been adjudicated to be in violation of the constitution, it finds that a******n is constitutionally legal, so the interference a state tries to do is violating that constitutionally legal thing. As the conservatives refuse to take that answer and appeal it, they continue to refuse to accept that they are in violation of legally acceptable laws as upheld by the constitution.

This is what adhering to established precedent is all about. The case cannot then be run up to a religiously conservative supreme court, because in fact the case is about whether the states violated constitutionally legal laws as they stand...not whether the constitutional law is valid or not.

The supreme court sets the law of the land, which is exactly why a state derived challenge to existing laws cannot be seen and overturned because what it does to the laws in every other state.

This and issues like the ACA are getting into ground where the right conservative values, which are the values of a minority of the people, can be run to the supreme court where they can literally overturn legislative legitimate laws that the house and senate can't, like the ACA. No law democrats pass can stand up to that, which os why the supreme court has to be fixed one way or another.

Here's a question I keep asking, what is wrong with judges that are not right or left leaning, pure centrists that have a long history of judicial decisions that adhere to law not right or left bias.

Another way to ask that, would a well respected judge like Garland who is almost dead centrist with a slightly right lean be acceptable, or is the only thing acceptable to the right a hardcore right judge that you know will put religious and political values ahead of the constitution?