Standing firm: Supreme Court justice correct in staying on redistricting case
Every once in a while a group takes a stand and you wonder -- how do they do it with a straight face?
That is the case in the trumped up challenge filed by the NAACP claiming that newly re-elected Justice Paul Newby cannot possibly rule on redistricting because of his recent election battle.
The claim is that Newby received too much money from Republican interests to be considered unbiased in the case.
Now think for a moment.
Wouldn't that negate the members of the other party who likely also received funds for their campaigns from interests representing their parties?
Wouldn't that mean also, by proxy, that all judges can be bought?
Newby is right to take a stand and to say no to the call for him to recuse himself. It is a publicity stunt -- and a waste of everyone's time.
Supreme Court justices should be judged on their performance on the court. If they follow the rule of law and do their jobs, they are re-elected. If their decisions show partisan bias, well then, they go. But the rules should apply to all sides.
Stop playing the partisanship card. Deal with the issue as a rule of law and move on.
Yes, it really is that simple.
Published in Editorials on December 4, 2012 11:22 AM