When selecting or advocating for or against a judicial
candidate, most people seem to be concerned with the
candidates point of view ie: liberal conservative etc.
Though everyone has bias, ideally the votes that a
person might make in a legislature or their written
opinions are not what is important. What is important
is whether that person would review any issue in
relation to the constitution, legislation, and
judicial precedence.
Will the future president use that criteria when
making judicial appointments?
Van Dell
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.