I wouldn't approach the issue of judging in the way the president does. Judges can't rely on what's in their heart. They don't determine the law. Congress makes the law. The job of a judge is to apply the law.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
We live in a period in which political disagreements are routinely handed over to the courts. Whenever you think that the president is wrong, you might well cry out that he has violated the Constitution - and ask federal judges to rule accordingly.
The president appoints the judges. Your lives and your children's lives can change by all of these appellate court judges who will be appointed who will reinterpret laws, and things can change.
I think any good judge recognizes his or her place in our constitutional government, and that place is not to upset the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives.
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.
A federal judge did as he was supposed to do and upheld the Constitution. We should be thankful that we have judiciary that will do that.
Nobody wants a judge to be subject to the political whim of the moment.
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.
A president shouldn't tell the judiciary what to do.
Judges should interpret the law, not make it.
So we need the same strategy, we need young, aggressive judges to be appointed, and that's what the President has done, but getting them through is the challenge.