| | | The reason they come to different legal conclusions is because the law can lead to multiple valid, logical, legal conclusions. It's as simple as that, as common as that, and as legitimate as that. I understand why that's difficult to accept.
Granted, there is some measure of political views or beliefs that drive interest and adherence to one doctrine over another. That's true for both sides of the coin. But to simply declare that democratically appointed judges reach the "right" conclusion and republican appointees the "wrong" conclusion is just, well, naive and displays an ignorance of the decisions that were made and the law and doctrine underlying them.
Ever read and studied in depth Roe v. Wade? I support its conclusion, but there's plenty of room to suggest it is nothing more than judicial hocus-pocus. Conservatives have valid legal arguments to support their argument that it was wrongly decided, frankly. As well, they have valid legal arguments that the decision should be left to state legislatures. I think both positions are the weaker of the two arguments on the issues, but that doesn't mean they are "making determinations and then finding the law." |
|
