Should there be a litmus test for judicial nominations?

[La_Serpiente]

Howard Dean said he wouldn't use a litmus test on abortion when he selected his judicial nominees. Dennis Kucinich said that he would use a litmus test when selecting his judicial nominees.

Should a litmus test be used at all? If Reagan & Bush I used a litmus test, we wouldn't have O'Conner & Souter.

[sandnsea]

1. The litmus test is upholding the law

That's Kerry's position. Abortion is pretty well-defined in law by now, so the litmus test is whether a judge will uphold that law. Or any controversial issues that are now recognized as law. That's how I understand it when he explains it anyway.

[philosophie_en_rose]

2. Yep.

First of all, will this judge construct marble eyesores and condemn the country for not worshipping a deity?

;)

All judges interpret the law to a certain degree. The issue is whether the judge has the integrity to interpret the law without placing personal bias above the Constitution and human dignity.

There are many laws that exist that may not be constitutional. Obviously, judges shouldn't simply follow the law that exists in those cases. They must evaluate whether laws and practices respect the inherent rights of humanity - or at least the rights endowed by the Constitution.

Respecting history and precedence is also vital, but not so much with issues that violate human rights. There were laws and precedence for segregated schools, but only a neocon can complain about that kind of judicial activism.

[Mercurius]

3. You made a great point

here -

All judges interpret the law to a certain degree. The issue is whether the judge has the integrity to interpret the law without placing personal bias above the Constitution and human dignity.

That point needs to really be repeated and driven home.

[arewethereyet]

4. thats it in a nutshell

thanks