judges for life

[iverglas]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/04/national/04recuse.html

On Moral Grounds, Some Judges Are Opting Out of Abortion Cases

By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: September 4, 2005

MEMPHIS - A pregnant teenager went to the grand and imposing county courthouse here early in the summer, saying she wanted an abortion. The circuit court judge refused to hear the case, and he announced that he would recuse himself from any others like it.

"Taking the life of an innocent human being is contrary to the moral order," the judge, John R. McCarroll of Shelby County Circuit Court, wrote in June. "I could not in good conscience make a finding that would allow the minor to proceed with the abortion."

The teenager was in court because Tennessee, like 18 other states, requires minors to obtain a parent's permission before they can have an abortion.

... The actions, similar in some ways to pharmacists' refusal to dispense drugs related to contraception or abortion on moral grounds, have set off a debate about the responsibilities of judges and the consequences of such recusals, including political ones when judges are elected rather than appointed.

Judge McCarroll's decision prompted 12 experts on judicial ethics to write to the Tennessee Supreme Court in late August. The experts called his action lawless and said they feared that his approach could spread around the nation and to subjects like the death penalty, medical marijuana, flag burning and even divorce.

"Unwillingness to follow the law," the letter said, "is not a legitimate ground for recusal."

Any reports of judges recusing themselves from death penalty cases because of their moral opposition to killing people? As I understand it, potential jurors in death penalty states are not allowed to serve on juries in such trials if they express opposition to the death penalty (presumably by being challenged by prosecution counsel, of course).

The way that a judge "recuses" him/herself from hearing cases in which s/he is unwilling to apply the law is to RESIGN.

One more reason, of course, why I'll never understand this business of electing members of the judicial branch of government.

[Nobody]

1. These delaying tactics make me angry

The more hoops someone has to go through to get an abortion, the more hoops someone has to go through to just get someone to make the decision to allow you to get an abortion eats up time. And meanwhile the clock is ticking and before long it will be into the third trimester.

That's when the judge will take the case after all and say that it's too late, it's too far along, go give birth, never mind that there are serious health risks for many minors.

It's my guess that this is what the antis are up to. Outlaw third trimester abortions. Force delays until the third trimester. Result: No abortion.