It’s too bad Bricker is on hiatus. I’m sure if he was here, he’d agree with this ruling. If you want to change immigration laws, you do it through the legislature – not Presidential proclamations or activist judges.
Republicans keep getting more and more right-wing, so it stands to reason that yesterday’s model of judge may not be perfectly aligned with today’s priorities. The same thing happens to politicians too, but they can be primaried. I’m not sure there’s a way around this risk. You can try to test for what a judge thinks today, but there’s no guarantee that he or she will watch enough Fox News shows to stay current on the real driving issues. Maybe the Federalist Society should start ranking their spouses as well, to make sure they all go home to someone like Ginni Thomas who will give them the propaganda directly.
Because that’s not what Republicans at the time or Democrats now look for in their Justices. We aren’t looking for people to rubber stamp our agenda. We’re looking for judges.
I do not know if there actually is an effect of the judges appointed by Democrats siding with the Democratic position on cases where it differs with the Republican one. But, if such an effect does exist, it’s not by design.
I would suspect it’s that whole “reality has a liberal bias” thing. There’s a reason why only conservatism had to create their own news network that vilifies the others. Liberalism kept working even with unbiased news.
The judges are well educated, and thus, if they change beliefs, are more likely to go leftward than rightward. That’s what happens when the right embraces anti-intellectualism.