"For my money, judicial arrogance and an "overinflated view of their intelligence and their abilities" would look like basing a politically motivated, but legally dubious Second Amendment opinion around a bunch of cases that conclude the opposite way if the judge bothered to read them. Or maybe using their perceived clout to blackmail a law school for not disrespecting student speech enough."
"But Ho's broadside against judicial arrogance does not begin from a point of honest self-assessment. Serious law journal submissions don't credulously include the phrase "woke Constitution," after all. Instead, the judge embarks on yet another rhetorical thirst trap aimed squarely at Donald Trump. Churning out inflammatory separate opinions can only go so far to burnish the resume of a Supreme Court hopeful. It's a challenge to stay top of mind in MAGA politics!"
Judge James Ho accuses many judges of arrogance and overestimating their intelligence and abilities. The conduct described includes issuing politically motivated, legally dubious Second Amendment opinions and ignoring precedent. The judge appears to deploy rhetoric like "woke Constitution" and crafts separate inflammatory opinions to gain prominence among MAGA circles and boost Supreme Court prospects. The behavior extends to confronting law schools over student speech and supporting the president against other judges. Critics see hypocrisy in condemning judicial supremacy while engaging in partisan publicity and selective legal reasoning.
Read at Above the Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]