8

Why we need real scrutiny


 

Emmett Macfarlane considers yesterday’s Supreme Court hearings.

While reform should be crafted to avoid the overt partisanship that infects the American process, any process we do design should acknowledge the political reality that different judges approach their function in different ways. That is where a public hearing can ultimately be useful. It is unfortunate that this second stab at the public interview process wasn’t used to shed light on how judging actually works.

(As a footnote: Team Macleans.ca will be expanding somewhat in the weeks and months ahead with a bevy of new contributors. Emmett, for instance, will be stopping by every so often with thoughts on the Supreme Court. Last month he wrote about the Court’s Insite decision. Equally smart and witty writers on a variety of political issues will soon follow. We’re excited.)


 

Why we need real scrutiny

  1. This comment was deleted.

    • That was constructive, but tell me, how do you really feel?

  2. “It is unfortunate that this second stab at the public interview process wasn’t used to shed light on how judging actually works.”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyos-M48B8U

    and

    “I could have been a Judge, but I never had the Latin for the judgin’. I never had it, so I’d had it, as far as being a judge was concerned… I would much prefer to be a judge than a coal miner because of the absence of falling coal.”

    • Oh my God -Beyond the Fringe!!!   Mind you don’t drop that heavy lump of coal on your foot…

  3. Maybe sometime Macfarlane can explain why he thinks American system should be avoided even tho he is keen on people knowing more about their Jurists. I read/know more about American supreme court and who is on it than I do about Canadian system and that’s pathetic. 

    I hope the equally smart and witty writers that have yet to appear are not Liberals like Macfarlane is because Maclean’s has plenty already. Libs are great for not taking a position and leaving readers confused because us non-Libs don’t really know what author is saying – not ok to ask ‘glib’ questions about Moldaver’s French but it’s acceptable to ask about his French, we should pay more attention to Supreme Court but not too much like Americans do.

    It is like reading Goldilocks, too hot, too cold …. 

    • You’re complaining about others leaving readers confused? 

    • There’s always the Toronto Sun if you feel that MacLean’s doesn’t accurately reflect your cosmology.

      • That’s just another leftist bastion to Tony, I’m sure.

        SDA is probably more his line.

Sign in to comment.