The News Tribune endorsement of Richard Sanders for Supreme Court Justice is quite preposterous. The endorsement (editorial, 10-18) reads like a flowing apology of unethical acts (some for which Sanders received sanctions), yet your editorial board views him as a rational voice for civil liberties.
There is enough diversity on the court to render balanced opinions. Sanders is simply on the bench to serve his own personal vendetta against the government.
As evidence of that, I note that Sanders’ opinions in criminal appeals favor the criminal defendant and are against the prosecution 94 percent of the time – certainly not a balanced or thoughtful approach. For reference, the opinions of the other justices on the court have favored the criminal defendant between 40 and 44 percent of the time.
In a ghastly display of antagonism, Sanders defends the right of a person being arrested to assault the police if, in the person’s mind, they feel as though the arrest is unlawful (State v. Valentine, 1997). In his dissenting opinion, Sanders writes, “Apparently the majority believes the unlawful use of state force is not anarchy but order. Yet I suggest such circumstances are not new, nor is the seeming futility of individual resistance to the overwhelming, yet still unlawful, police power of the state.”
Sanders did not even know if the arrest in this case was unlawful! (The arrest was upheld as being lawful.)
Sanders remains a horrid choice for Supreme Court. It is time to rid our courts of his openly biased agenda.