Quote

I don't have any respect for judges who arrive at the result first, and then try to figure out some way they can bend the law to reach their particular predilections.

Judges are real people with real-world experiences and backgrounds. We cannot expect them to erase their experiences and backgrounds from the mindset that informs their judicial decision-making.

Judges must be free from political intervention or intimidation.

Judges have to have the humility to recognize that they operate within a system of precedent, shaped by other judges equally striving to live up to the judicial oath.

One thing I know from personal experience, judges hate it when parties talk publicly about their cases. There are a lot of things about our criminal legal system that need to be changed, and this is just one of them. Prosecutors know how to play the press. Most defendants don't.

I remain mindful that the role of a judge is a limited one and that judges can't solve every problem. But at the same time, judges play a crucial role in safeguarding liberty and protecting the rights of all citizens.

Judges rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to pressures of the times.

But one way or another, judges perform a very vital function in our society. They have a risky job and they are entitled to security.

Judges wear legal professionalism and precedent as a mantel that secures legitimacy for their decisions. It's how they distinguish themselves from politicians or administrative agencies, while wielding power that is sometimes much greater than those democratically accountable actors.

A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge... stretching for results he prefers rather than those the law demands.