Who is your favourite judge(s) in the Supreme court?

Who is your favourite judge(s) in the Supreme court?

Other urls found in this thread:

abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/ginsburg-likes-s-africa-as-model-for-egypt/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

ringo

I don't particularly care for anyone on the Sanhedrin.

the negro

Thomas

Ginger Spice.

The bib goblin

>yfw the black guy is the only good one

Why?

Sotomayor

Let me start with the obvious conclusion that anyone would draw if they were to get to know Judge Sotomayor and her work both intimately and deeply: she is anabsolutely brilliantjurist andanabsolutely brilliantperson.Having clerked for her, worked very closely with her over the course of a year, and then known her well for more than a decade, I have a very good take on who she is both as a judge and as a person.Ordinarily, I would not weigh in on things like this, but, given some of the spurious comments that have been emerging from people who are less familiar with her, I feel a need to set the record straight.
I count myself privileged to have worked closely with some of the very best minds in the world, in both law (at Yale Law School and in the legal academy) and philosophy (at both Harvard College and the University of Michigan’s graduate school, which was widely considered the best department in ethics in the world when I was there.)Judge Sotomayor stands out from among these people as one of the very brightest; indeed, she is in that rarified class of people for whom it makes sense to say that there isno one genuinely smarter.(Others who have stood out in this way in my experience would include Harold Koh, the former dean of Yale Law School, and Peter Railton, a moral philosopher at the University of Michigan.) Judge Sotomayor is much smarter than most people in the legal academy, and much smarter than most judges who are granted almost universal deference in situations like this.And while I have worked with numerous people who are thought of as some of the best minds in the nation, and about whom the question of brilliance would never even arise, most of them are—quite frankly—pedantic in comparison

He is the only one that cares about the Constitution

The Protestant ones.

Good luck with that.

>Sotomayor
Trash.

Clarence Thomas

scalia when he was alice, now thomas. gorsuch has potential to be as good as scalia though.

>"I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the Constitution of South Africa," says Ginsburg, whom President Clinton nominated to the court in 1993. "That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary. … It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the U.S. Constitution."

abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/ginsburg-likes-s-africa-as-model-for-egypt/

This

"Three generations of imbeciles is enough"
- Oliver Wendell Holmes

thomas > scalia
Scalia punted on completely gutting the commerce clause

Did you really clerked for her?

And what can you say about other judges? I mean, you could have met some of them.

you can tell a lot by the person just looking at their face

This is obviously copypasta. Come on Russia.

I love reading Scalia's opinions. It's a shame he's gone.

Indeed, Judge Sotomayor reminds me in some ways of Obama himself in that she hassurprisingdimensionsto her brilliance, which are completely original to her.She knows how to pull out the best in people with whom she works, how to motivate people through her words and conduct, and how to forge deep and abiding relationships with people from all walks of life, and from all political stripes and ideologies.She is courageous and fearless, but non-ideological, and wholly unimpressed by the kind of pomp and false theoretical excess that can sometimes make one look smarter in the short term but only at the expense of distorting the underlying issues.The force of character that it takes to live such a life should never be underestimated: we have no other person on the bench with her experience and intellect who has come from these beginnings and who has developed with such clarity of purpose and vision.The federal judiciary houses a number of intellectual giants, but, if we are honest with ourselves, we will have to admit that almost none of them would have made it to where they are from her starting point.The temptations to take other paths would have been far too strong, and the absence of hope too stultifying.Because of this, she also has the power to lift people up, and inspire.Her story can bring unique hope to many for whom there is only despair; can help heal some of the deepest internal crises of faith that people struggling in this country have had to face; and can establish the fact (about which there is still far too much unwarranted skepticism) that brilliance comes in many surprising forms.She can also give a concrete face to the American promise, and what we stand for as a country, and to the kind of change that will bring us directly back to our core human values.

Antonin Scalia

Disagree on this. Scalia wasn't afraid to explain his genuine thoughts on issue, while Thomas flip-flopped, claiming "Let's leave this question to the states, because I don't like the answer".

>gutting the commerce clause
Which has been abused beyond recognition.

Literally all it was meant to do was to give the federal government authority to stop the States from placing tariffs on each other essentially like a "free trade"(in it's proper definition of no tariffs unrestricted trade between any parties that wish to do so none of the protectionist cronyism like NAFTA and tpp) deal because under the articles of confederation this was a yuge problem.

And to be quite frankly the articles should have never been replaced with the Constitution only fix the small issues like the tariffs between states

>"Let's leave this question to the states, because I don't like the answer".
Or maybe because the 10th amendment

The ghost of Scalia.

Bump