Can somebody say ‘Recused’?
Leftist activists shop around for complicit judges. Looks like they knew EXACTLY who they wanted for this case! It was a no-brainer.
During a court hearing, Robart became “deeply personal,” as the Seattle Times noted, when he pointed to FBI statistics.
“The importance, to me, of this issue is best demonstrated by the news, which was much reported again today,” Robart said with emotion. “According to FBI statistics, police shootings resulting in deaths involve 41 percent black people despite being only 20 percent of the population living in those cities. Forty-one percent of the casualties, 20 percent of the population. Black lives matter.” — Lifezette
Watch federal judge James Robart's #BlackLivesMatter declaration, plus his challenge to Seattle's police union. pic.twitter.com/UDgQl2XCiu
— Ansel Herz (@Ansel) August 23, 2016
As they say in those late-night infomercials… ‘but wait! there’s more!’
..Prior to Robart’s “black lives matter” statement, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) praised him for his dedication to pro bono legal work representing refugees.
“[Robart] has been active in the representation of the disadvantaged through his work with Evergreen Legal Services and the independent representation of Southeast Asian refugees,” Hatch said during Robart’s confirmation hearing, according to CNN.
In his own words during his confirmation hearing, Robart described how he would approach the cases he considered.
“I was introduced to people who in many times felt that the legal system was stacked against them or was unfair,” Robard said. “And one of the things, I think, that my time there helped accomplish was to show them that the legal system was set up for their benefit and that it could be, if properly used, an opportunity for them to seek redress if they had been wronged.” — Lifezette
Say, isn’t there some sort of a rule about judges ruling on issues about which they are personally invested?
We see him caring enough about the Refugee issue that he was ‘active in representing the disadvantaged … refugees’.
Is that what ‘dispassionate’ looks like? ‘Arms-length’? Objective?
And if not…
Why did he even hear the case in the first place?
You don’t suppose he WANTED to be a judicial activist… do you?
