So a friend, who’s a lawyer, tell’s me she once
aspired to be a judge and somehow expected me to laugh.

I didn’t.

I happen to think it can be a pretty noble profession.
Then she tells me it had a lot to do with her
picturing herself in a cape, as opposed to robes.

Then I fucking cackled.

Anyway.

She asked why I thought it so noble.

I said law is a discipline that ought to be adhered to faithfully and
that the best judges hold that discipline above every other ideology.

If they are faithful to the rule of law, the science and language of it, the empirical execution of it, judges are Wizards.

Then she asked me to define ideology.

I said ideology is based on moral presumption. She pointed to
religion and I said yes. The guiltiest of bureaucracies
for the crime of fomenting morality and therefore
ideology, are religious.

I said the good judges, the Wizards, are ethical, not idedological.

She asked what the difference between ethics and
morals are.

I said honesty.

Honesty is black and white. Morality
is subject to interpretation but honesty is very
easily defined. To steal is not honest. To exploit
is not honest. To lie or betray the truth is not
honest. To kill is unethical.

Honesty is still compassionate. Ethics must still have a heart.

Thurgood Marshall, who argued Brown v. Board of Education and later sat on the Supreme Court.

Wizard.

William O. Douglas wrote:

“Inanimate objects are sometimes parties in litigation. A ship has a legal personality, a fiction found useful for maritime purposes. The corporation sole – a creature of ecclesiastical law – is an acceptable adversary and large fortunes ride on its cases . . . . So it should be as respects valleys, alpine meadows, rivers, lakes, estuaries, beaches, ridges, groves of trees, swampland, or even air that feels the destructive pressures of modern technology and modern life. The river, for example, is the living symbol of all the life it sustains or nourishes – fish, aquatic insects, water ouzels, otter, fisher, deer, elk, bear, and all other animals, including man, who are dependent on it or who enjoy it for its sight, its sound, or its life. The river as plaintiff speaks for the ecological unit of life that is part of it.” -Wikipedia

Wizard.

Souter contemplated losing his shit or retiring after The Supreme Court finished with Gore v. Bush in ’00.

Wizard.

Where there are Wizards there will be Warlocks.

William Rehnquist, who took the dirt nap opposing Roe v. Wade. Scalia and Thomas, dirty bastards both.

Scalia goes hunting with Dick Cheney, doesn’t get shot in the face or recuse himself from the decision on whether Cheney has to tell us who shaped our disastrous energy policy.

You think ethics played any part in our United States Office of Attorney General firing eight federal prosecutors for refusing to pursue bogus charges of voting fraud against Democratic voter registration groups?

Hello and goodbye to long time Dick-in-Bush crony Alberto Gonzales. You obsequious prick.

Warlocks.

I offer these mere four as champions of adjudicating on behalf of percieved morality from the bench. Personal ideology over ethical adherence to law.

Our new attorney general claimed to not know what “waterboarding” is.

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

Warlocks, because of moral presumption over fairness.

Judges aren’t the only ones who can be Wizards.

I’m just saying.

Drinks for my friends.