Several studies show the ABA's systematic ratings bias against GOP judicial noms. Even so, 68.75% of President Trump's judicial noms have been ABA-rated "well qualified" vs. 65.3% for first-term Obama, 66.4% for GW Bush, and 63% for Clinton (the ABA changed its scale in 1990).
— Thomas Jipping (@TomJipping) October 15, 2020
What this is saying is that even Trump's enemies have to admit that the judges he's selecting are highly competent.
The simple reality is that judges who are honest, ie who rule based on what the Constitution actually says rather than on what they'd like it to say, tend to be more competent, and are certainly more trustworthy than judges who believe their job is to "fix" America.
Further it shows that the wild Democrat claims about the "horrors" of Trump's appointees are based solely on the desire of Democrats to impose on we the people through the acts of dishonest, activist judges those policies, like redefining sex as gender, that they can't get passed through the democratic process.
Trump is packing the Court with men and women who will follow the Constitution whether it supports what Trump wants or prevents Trump from doing what he wants. Democrat judges on the other hand tend to rule based on what Democrats think is good irrespective of what the Constitution actually says.
For example there is no right to privacy in the Constitution nor is there any reference to a wall of separation. Yet activist judges have created both out of thin air in order to justify imposing on all of us the whims of radical Democrats.
Joe Biden would, if elected, appoint judges who would subvert the democratic process and essentially make elections meaningless since appointed for life dishonest judges would actually define what the law of the land is.
Remember that when you go to vote.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment