ADVERTISEMENT

Judges running amok

UncleMark

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Sep 1, 2001
36,851
41,227
113
Pick your favorite:


Regarding that Ivermectin case . . . seems to me that the lady was down to a last resort sort of decision . . . and the court concluded "what can it hurt, if he's going to die anyway?". If you're down by 5 and the ball's on the 50 yard line with 2 seconds to go . . . why not try the Hail Mary . . . it almost seems like malpractice not to . . . but only in those circumstances.

BTW, I agree with the conclusion that the hucksters advocating for use of Ivermectin are in the same category with snake oil salesmen. In this instance, nothing else seems to have cured Mr. Smith, so why not try a little snake oil under a prescription and watchful eye of a physician who claims to have had some luck with it?

Regarding the other case - the custody revocation - I've been wondering when the vax/anti-vax divide was going to hit domestic relations orders. Seems to me that parents refusing to get vaccinated run a risk of being charged with child abuse if a kid gets COVID from an unvaxxed custodial or visiting parent . . . and maybe risks being charged with neglect if the parent puts the child at risk of infection by not getting vaxxed. So this decision doesn't surprise me in a way. IIRC, the court's charge is the best interests of the child, not what the custodial parent's preference is.

What does surprise me is that the court brought up the COVID vaccination issue sua sponte, or on his own. It wasn't raised by the other parent . . . which begs the question why the hell not?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hoot1 and UncleMark
What does surprise me is that the court brought up the COVID vaccination issue sua sponte, or on his own. It wasn't raised by the other parent . . . which begs the question why the hell not?

Based solely on the scant info in the article, this hearing was supposed to be about money. Either the judge has a burr up his ass or there's much much more going on than what the article presented. Probably some of both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Based solely on the scant info in the article, this hearing was supposed to be about money. Either the judge has a burr up his ass or there's much much more going on than what the article presented. Probably some of both.
The judge has wide latitude to raise any issue relevant to a domestic order in a DR (domestic relations) case. The lady paid her money and took her chances . . . and lost.

People think they're entitled to control so many things that they have no business being in control of . . . and are shocked to find out that somebody else has that control.
 
Do courts really want to get involved deciding access to care issues? I think not, it's a black-hole. This is a role for courts in countries that have determined health care is a human right (eg, Columbia and Brazil).
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamieDimonsBalls
Pick your favorite:


That’s an incomprehensible and indefensible decision. It’s almost as if we’ve built vaccine into a supernatural superstition. To deprive a kid of parental contact because the kid is exposed to a condition that has a 99.9+ survival rate is awful. I wonder what that judge would do if the parent allowed the kid ride a bike with no helmet.
 
That’s an incomprehensible and indefensible decision. It’s almost as if we’ve built vaccine into a supernatural superstition. To deprive a kid of parental contact because the kid is exposed to a condition that has a 99.9+ survival rate is awful. I wonder what that judge would do if the parent allowed the kid ride a bike with no helmet.
Okay, and what about the other one?
 
That’s an incomprehensible and indefensible decision. It’s almost as if we’ve built vaccine into a supernatural superstition. To deprive a kid of parental contact because the kid is exposed to a condition that has a 99.9+ survival rate is awful. I wonder what that judge would do if the parent allowed the kid ride a bike with no helmet.

CoH, good point, but what if the child was exposed to an environment where Covid was claiming many lives.

Certainly a judge would take this into consoderation.
 
CoH, good point, but what if the child was exposed to an environment where Covid was claiming many lives.

Certainly a judge would take this into consoderation.
There are a million ways to disagree about health and safety of kids. For the court to weigh in, without near unanimity in expert opinion, is a mistake. Blood transfusion cases where the consequence is sure death, will prompt judicial intervention. I don’t think vaccines are the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_6hv78pr714xta
The judge has wide latitude to raise any issue relevant to a domestic order in a DR (domestic relations) case. The lady paid her money and took her chances . . . and lost.

People think they're entitled to control so many things that they have no business being in control of . . . and are shocked to find out that somebody else has that control.
I'll bet that judge in the domestic relations case gets reversed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sope Creek
The Chicago judge, Shapiro, reversed his ruling, and I guess has now recused himself from the case. I talked to some family lawyers here who say he's a loose cannon and does crazy stuff all the time.

Reminds me of a guy I went to high school with . . . he became a judge and ordered a woman to be sterilized as a part of her sentence.
 
Reminds me of a guy I went to high school with . . . he became a judge and ordered a woman to be sterilized as a part of her sentence.
Sentence? Or condition of probation? I'm thinking it would have to be the latter.
 
Reminds me of a guy I went to high school with . . . he became a judge and ordered a woman to be sterilized as a part of her sentence.
If he isn't already on the Supreme Court or already appointed for life as a federal judge, he probably missed his big chance unless Trump gets reinstated.
 
If he isn't already on the Supreme Court or already appointed for life as a federal judge, he probably missed his big chance unless Trump gets reinstated.
I would have guessed he was a Democrat or appointed by a Democrat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NPT
ADVERTISEMENT