Something that has always perplexed me are judges claiming party affiliation. Call me crazy but isn't a "judge" supposed to be an impartial party to the judicial process that makes decisions based on the facts, and laws at hand?
Of course this is election season and the various campaigns are in full force. In the particular district I reside in there is a heated campaign for an appellate court seat. Both the Republican and Democratic candidate are using all forms of media to promote their worthiness to sit on the throne. The good news is the candidates are not using attack ad's against each other. However, I still find it ridiculous that someone who is supposed to pass an unbiased judgement against another will do so under a party affiliation. Granted the Supreme Court houses conservative individuals and liberal ones. The difference being each one does not identify themselves with a party.
This how the judicial system is supposed to be, unaffiliated. Law enforcement even gets involved when it elects the top sheriff running as one party or another.
When you run under party affiliation for positions such as a Judge, or Sheriff you are typically accepting support from that party. When it comes time to pay the piper in your courtroom, or even the jailhouse, how can the public be assured that an unbiased decision is being made in accordance with the law? Running under a party flag doesn't give you that ability especially when one of your supporters finds themselves across from you in a legal proceeding.
When it comes to the judicial system all candidates should be unaffiliated and run on merit only. Running under any party status does not fully allow for due process to complete its course.
No comments:
Post a Comment