Give this a listen, and ponder the question: why on Earth would Governor Christie of New Jersey want to replace his state’s judges? Why would he want to “remake the court in a more conservative image?”
If the judges were impartial, than what difference would it make who sits on the bench? Judges would have no preconceived notions of who should win and who should lose. They would impartially weigh parties’ argument, and then impartially give victory to the stronger one. Why would it matter that it is a Democrat Joe who’s doing this evaluation, or a Republican Jim, a conservative Mary or a liberal Jane? Facts and law adduced by the parties are same no matter who’s the judge; logic is a science, so the result of deducing whose argument is stronger should not vary depending on who’s examining the facts and applying the logic to them. The end result of the case should be exactly the same no matter who – a Republican or Democrat, a liberal or a conservative – is occupying the bench.
But as politicians like Gov. Christie know full well, this is not how judges work. While the powers that be want the public to believe in judicial impartiality so the system isn’t upended, judges do not operate in an impartial, logical, rational manner. They do not care about facts, and when they do apply the logic, they apply it to the facts they themselves invent, not those presented by the parties. “Judicial process” is utterly arbitrary, its result having nothing to do with what parties argued, but only with judges’ whim; this is why who’s on the bench makes all the difference in the world.
We get this lesson from the politicians every time there is a judicial nomination, yet we are unable to grasp its implications, which are as follows: judicial impartiality is a myth; parties’ argument makes no difference whatsoever; the exchange of motions is just for the show; judges neither serve the cause of justice, nor follow the law; “due process of the law” is but a legalized swindle; the only one who fully figured out the system is Kafka.
This lesson stares us in the face; yet our power of reason is so dimmed and subdued by social brainwashing that no matter how often this lesson is being repeated – and it is being repeated with every single judicial nomination – we just can’t get it. Bizarre!