The "So-Called" President

This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

When I first read that President Trump had called a judge who ruled against him a “so-called judge”, I was infuriated as I assume many others were apparently including the new nominee to the Supreme Court.. However, as a former member of the federal judiciary, we should not rush to fault the President on his choice of words. Although I have not heard or read of any judge who deserves or earned the label, I concede that the label may be appropriate in some instances (but not this one) despite the fact a judge has been nominated by the President, approved by the Senate, taken the oath to defend the Constitution and has attained all of the trappings of the office, if that “so-called” label was directed at a judge who

publicly proclaims that he would have received more confirmation votes in the Senate but for unsupported claims of fraud;

refuses to remove (recuse) himself from a case despite his financial interest in the outcome; declares that sexual abuse and harassment is permissible if done by famous people;

always disparages and ridicules lawyers who argue against the position he favors:

mocks and imitates those with physical disabilities who appear before him:

intentionally and knowingly relies upon false facts or non-existent facts in arriving at decisions;

blames biased reversals of his decisions on the religion, national origin, gender or race of the appellate judges (or their parents):

bars all Muslims (from a certain section of the city) from entering his public courtroom for fear of terrorist activities:

attacks all media and others who criticize his decisions, as “liars, losers, dishonest and overrated”;

issues orders adversely affecting the lives of thousands of others without giving them or any one required to enforce the order a warning or opportunity to be heard;

makes rulings and signs orders prepared by his staff without fully understanding their import;

ignores the testimony of experts, but relies rather on what he has heard or read on TV or the internet;

instead of attending to his judicial duties, publicly responds to every personal slight or criticism of him and invariably demeans the critic personally;

in sentencing he relies upon and falsely claims that there been a large increase in the murder rate;

is more focused on the popularity of his decisions rather than their correctness;

abuses his power and intimidates private companies by publicly chastising those who refuse or cease doing business with his children;

finally, is one who fails to act with the dignity, impartiality and respect for the rule of law, separation of powers and the office held. Yes, if a judge did all or most of these things, I think the label of “so-called judge” would be warranted. The respect and title of “Judge” or “President” although bestowed by nominations and election------ must also be earned. Otherwise it is fair to label them “so-called judge” or “so-called President”.

Popular in the Community