Member-only story
All Judges Are Biased
Can Amy Coney Barrett interpret The Constitution fairly? Passionate opinions cover the map on this critical topic. Too many focus on bias and miss the mark. Barrett cannot and will not be unbiased because no judge is.
Republicans and Barrett herself frequently claim that she can interpret the law in an unbiased manner. Her personal opinions do not matter. This claim does not really make sense as many aspects of law require judges to use critical thinking to figure out what a law intends. Critical thinking is neither free from explicit nor implicit bias. Our beliefs, particularly on matters of justice, are the crucial framework for what we decide is right and wrong.
Our constitution does not deny this reality. In fact, in many ways the Constitution’s wording seems to embrace it. Take the Second Amendment for example: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In some capacity, people in America have the right to firearms. The specifics are left open to interpretation. The phrase “well regulated”, being a value judgment, is incredibly subjective. There is no one correct, objective answer. To come to a decision, someone must use moral judgment. To use real world examples, someone could view good regulation as strict regulation. They would argue that the constitution allows for…
