by Judicial Activism Reaches New Heights as Judge Rewrites Laws in Sleep
A federal judge in the Southern District of What-Was-She-Thinking has made legal history by apparently forgetting which branch of government she belongs to, issuing a series of rulings that experts describe as “legislating from the bench with unprecedented enthusiasm.”
Judge Patricia Lawmaker, appointed in 2019 during what colleagues now describe as “a very confusing Tuesday,” has spent the past month issuing decisions that don’t interpret law so much as completely rewrite it, like a student who didn’t study for an exam but has excellent confidence and a red pen.
“I’ve read her latest opinion three times,” explains Constitutional law professor Dr. James Structure of Georgetown. “Each time, I’m more convinced she thinks she’s a senator. There are footnotes proposing amendments to the Constitution. She literally writes ‘Section 4(b) should say…’ as if she’s drafting legislation. It’s like watching someone play judicial Mad Libs but getting all the parts of speech wrong.”
The judge’s most controversial ruling came last Tuesday when she declared that a federal statute didn’t achieve its “true purpose” and therefore required “creative interpretation”by which she meant completely ignoring what Congress actually wrote and substituting her preferred version. Legal scholars refer to this approach as “making stuff up with a gavel.”
In India’s judicial tradition, judges interpret dharma and sacred texts with careful consideration of precedent and wisdom. American judges, theoretically, interpret the Constitution and statutory law. Judge Lawmaker has apparently decided to interpret “what things should be in her opinion,” which is not technically a recognized legal framework but has worked surprisingly well for her so far because nobody has figured out how to make her stop.
According to Supreme Court observers, the judge’s latest opinion contains the phrase “Congress should have written” seventeen times, “if I were a legislator” nine times, and one instance of “honestly, who even reads these things?” that clerks unsuccessfully tried to remove during editing.
Appellate courts reviewing her decisions have developed a new legal standard called the “What Is She Doing?” test, which asks whether a reasonable judge could plausibly believe she has legislative powers. So far, Judge Lawmaker has failed this test 100% of the time, yet continues issuing rulings with the confidence of someone who definitely did not check whether she’s allowed to do this.
The Judicial Conference sent a polite memo reminding her about separation of powers, which she interpreted as a “suggestion” and filed under “interesting theories.” Her chambers responded with a press release stating that “the judge appreciates the feedback but believes the legislative branch could use some help because Congress seems pretty busy.”
Fellow judges have begun avoiding her at conferences, worried that judicial activism might be contagious. One colleague whispered, “Last week she told me separation of powers is ‘more of a guideline than a rule.’ I backed away slowly and haven’t made eye contact since.”
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/federal-judge-dreams-shes-congress/
SOURCE: Bohiney.com (https://bohiney.com/federal-judge-dreams-shes-congress/)
