Ritter makes the ultimate PC selection
Perhaps in an effort to make up for his failed attempt to promote his Hispanic female employee, Stephanie Villafuerte, to be US Attorney for Colorado, our utterly worthless governor has passed over two qualified judges to select Hispanic lesbian activist Monica Marquez to replace outgoing State Supreme Court Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey for a two year term before Marquez must face a retention vote.
Marquez is on the Board of Directors of both the the Colorado Hispanic Bar Association and the Colorado GLBT Bar Association. In other words, she is a full-fledged kool-aid drinking member of the left’s cult of identity politics and someone who will almost certainly be unable to rule objectively in a case where either the plaintiff or defendant is part of some (obviously oppressed) minority group.
Perhaps more disgusting than the obviously PC and far-left-pandering nature of the pick – which I had hoped Ritter would not make because he’s not running for re-election – is the fact that Marquez was the key attorney who argued (successfully, as she was arguing to a majority of leftist fellow travelers) that “fee” increases are not “tax” increases, even if such fees are not targeted to be spent by the government on particular things, and that therefore the government can effectively ignore the taxpayer-passed TABOR Amendment to the state constitution. This is a woman who clearly is unfit to hold any office involving the public trust.
In the apple not falling far from the tree category, Ms. Marquez’s father was also a judge, about whom John Andrews wrote in 2006 that he “rank(ed) dead last (37% out of a possible 100) among the appeals court judges in our 1997-2005 scorecard of cases relating to Colorado’s economic growth, prosperity, and job creation." Furthermore, Judge Marquez had, according to Andrews, “what amounts to an F grade on his official performance report for retention (but with a strange recommendation to be retained anyway on a 6-4 vote of the commission).”
We’re seeing a trend here with Sotomayor, Kagan, and now Marquez: judges whose obvious bias (including in Sotomayor’s explicit words) makes them incapable of living in a world where justice is blind. Instead, if a participant in a case is Hispanic, female, or gay, I’d expect them to have a huge advantage in front of these women. That very fact should have been disqualifying, but since Democrats are about anything but the Founding Principles of this nation, they are making every effort to destroy it from within while they still have the power to do so.
All we can do at this point is hope that fear of Clear The Bench Colorado will keep Marquez from being as radical as she otherwise might be, since she’s up for retention in two years. I’m not optimistic. I’d also note that if the GOP hadn’t selected such a disaster of a candidate, Marquez’s selection would be great fodder for the Republican candidate in the governor’s race. As it stands, that race is lost for conservatives.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Rossputin on 09/09/10 at 07:57:00 am . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |

09/09/10 @ 07:02:09 pm
To the victor goes the spoils.... What you fail to acknowledge is that Elena Kagan was spot-on: Judges have declared that they are now our "Platonic Guardians" -- the politically correct way to say "absolute dictators." Judges Bork, Scalia, and Posner have all registered concurrences, and Republican judges are every bit as bad, if not worse.
Through their heavy-handed opinions, Republican nominees have insulated both the government and their agents from any and all responsibility for lawless actions, which is hopelessly corrosive to republican government. St. George Tucker noted that "representative democracy ceases to exist the moment that the public functionaries are by any means absolved from their responsibility to their constituents.” Ronald Reagan rightly added that some governments “make elaborate claims that citizens under their rule enjoy human rights,” … but “[e]ven if words look good on paper, the absence of structural safeguards against abuse of power means they can be taken away as easily as they are allowed.”
Unfortunately, America resembles that remark.
09/09/10 @ 07:05:41 pm
Ken,
I agree somewhat. The "Republican" judges are better than the liberal judges, but not much and not consistently.
09/11/10 @ 07:19:09 pm
There is a remedy for activist judges built into the constitution. It is called impeachment and removal; however, the two party system has rendered it almost impossible to use.
09/11/10 @ 07:22:04 pm
I also want to add to my comment that the 17th amendment probably added to the difficulty of impeachment and removal.