You may have read recently about the judge in Utah who took a child in the process of being adopted by a lesbian couple out of that couple’s home, maintaining that it was an unfit environment for a child to be raised.
The judge had not a bit of research to back his claim that being raised in such a home would be bad for the child. That’s a bad thing.
The judge also had not a bit of law on his side in exercising his authority in this manner. That’s a worse thing.
There was a great hue and cry over this decision and even the state’s Republican governor got involved, criticizing the judge’s decision. Faced with such outrage, the judge relented – but only, it should be noted, temporarily. He could still take the child from the couple at a hearing next month.
Hillary Clinton immediately expressed her dismay over the judge’s unilateral decision that had no foundation in either research or law.
The Republican presidential candidates? As far as The Curmudgeon can tell, none of uttered a word.
Not a peep.
That’s a problem on two fronts.
First, what the judge did was just plain wrong. There’s not a single shred of evidence to suggest that a lesbian couple can’t raise a child into a good human being and solid citizen.
Second, and more important, where’s the outrage from these Republican candidates over yet another activist judge who uses his robes to pursue his own ideological agenda without regard for the law?
Where’s the outrage over yet another instance of judicial activism?
Or is it only “judicial activism” when the judge does something of which you disapprove?