On Monday the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled on a case from the state of Wisconsin.  They ruled 5-3 refusing to reinstate a lower court order that called for mailed ballots to be counted if they are received up to six days after the November 3rd  election.

That was not the most interesting part of the reporting, what interested me was what the “liberal” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the dissent for herself and the other two liberals on the court.  Also what “conservative” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote and the contrast between the two ideologies.  It is a perfect example to show why we need more judges at every level who believe in textualism, in a nutshell, it means strict or rigid adherence to a text.

Liberal Justice Elena Karan wrote:


When I first read that I thought to myself; that is not your job as a Judge.  You may be concerned about that but it is the role of the legislature to address that concern.  Your role as a Judge is to read the law as written and passed by the legislatures and determine if someone or group is or are following the law.

I then read the “Conservative” Justice Neil Gorsuch who wrote:


I thought to myself you are exactly right Justice Gorsuch.  The role of a Judge is not to make law but to read the law as passed by the legislature and applying it to the case at hand.

Judges do not make law state Representatives and Senators make law.

What type of judge would you rather be in front of?  Vote President Trump and that judge will judge you against the written word of law.  Vote Joe Biden and that judge will judge you on what race you are, what body parts you have, who you like to sleep with and however they and their party feel about the issue that day.

I would rather be in front of a Trump judge.