Having read a lot of right leaning forums, bloggers and pundits pissing and moaning about Obama's emphasis on empathy as a an important quality in a judge while insisting empathy is a code word for judicial activism I wanted to share this with you all.

Looks like President Bush was using code words too! Except he didn't just say empathy he said "great empathy"

So please...enough about the empathy being a code word.

From Bush's July 1, 1991, remarks nominating Clarence Thomas (accessed from the Nexis database):

After graduation from Yale Law School, he worked for then Missouri attorney general John Danforth, and spent 2 1/2 years litigating cases of all descriptions. In 1977, Judge Thomas practiced law in the private sector, and in 1979, he rejoined Senator Danforth as a legislative assistant in the U.S. Senate. In 1981, President Reagan appointed him Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights in the Department of Education. From 1982 to 1990, he served as President Reagan's Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. And I appointed him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1990.

I have followed this man's career for some time, and he has excelled in everything that he has attempted. He is a delightful and warm, intelligent person who has great empathy and a wonderful sense of humor. He's also a fiercely independent thinker with an excellent legal mind, who believes passionately in equal opportunity for all Americans. He will approach the cases that come before the Court with a commitment to deciding them fairly, as the facts and the law require.

Judge Thomas' life is a model for all Americans, and he's earned the right to sit on this nation's highest Court. And I am very proud, indeed, to nominate him for this position, and I trust that the Senate will confirm this able man promptly.

empathy
Noun
the ability to sense and understand someone else's feelings as if they were one's own


sounds like a needed trait for a judge

but hey

what do i know

A Supreme court judge does not make law, they only interpret the law. They don't only ever see the counsel. They don't speak to witnesses or defendants. Cases brought before them are only intellectual debates about the law. If you think empathy is so important tell me how it plays a role in the Supreme Court. I said before I don't care who is making the argument Bush or Obama, you can keep the empathy. I think an understanding of the law and the constitution is so much more important, that empathy is meaningless.

how can one interpret law a if law b could lead to law a being a factor of why law a was broken to begin with


yes maybe empathy is a bad thing but if perk of crime b was breaking into victims house where his family was thus he broke crime a as the act of crime b was being performed then yes empathy should be present

not all states have castle laws even tho they should

and if one is convicted of murder for protecting ones castle then empathy should apply imo

this could also be expanded to one stealing the life savings of a family and putting them in dire need if member of said family commits a crime against those that created said situation then that should also be a factor in the determination