Reader comments
Judge's nomination rejected
80 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
Mike R. | 9:37 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
It's not sad for democracy when a judge gets rejected. History is repleat
with Judges and Attys. nominated for the Federal Bench or U.S. Supreme Court
that were rejected for no other reason than politics. Bush couldn't get
many judge nominees past the Senate Judiciary committee just for that reason.
Most all of these judge nominees got the highest rating from the A.B.A. and had
no other problems. One good example is Judge Robert Bork. he had impeccable
credentials, extremely well qualified but had his name turned into an adjective
for a legal crucifiction. He was lied about and reputation besmirched by none
other than that solid citizen Ted Kennedy.
If Hilder got rejected for the same reasons, politics, so be it. That is the Senate doing their job.
If Hilder got rejected for the same reasons, politics, so be it. That is the Senate doing their job.
VF | 9:37 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Dear Twotanks:
In order to escape the tyrannies of England and Ireland in the early 1700's my family immigrated here to the American colonies that are now this great country you live in. I have family members who have fought and died in every war we have been invloved in so that people like you and I could speak out. Because of our constitution we Americans are allowed to carry weapons to protect our famlies, ourselves and folks like yourself.
Your statement that only police should carry weapons is a large mistake. Right now we have millions of illegal immigrants who have snuck into the USA and many of them have joined gangs and now carry and use concealed weapons, guns, knives, etc.
If you are here leagally I suggest that you either become an American like the rest of us or go back to your native land. If you are here illegally, go home and come back in the way you should and we will welcome you back.
In order to escape the tyrannies of England and Ireland in the early 1700's my family immigrated here to the American colonies that are now this great country you live in. I have family members who have fought and died in every war we have been invloved in so that people like you and I could speak out. Because of our constitution we Americans are allowed to carry weapons to protect our famlies, ourselves and folks like yourself.
Your statement that only police should carry weapons is a large mistake. Right now we have millions of illegal immigrants who have snuck into the USA and many of them have joined gangs and now carry and use concealed weapons, guns, knives, etc.
If you are here leagally I suggest that you either become an American like the rest of us or go back to your native land. If you are here illegally, go home and come back in the way you should and we will welcome you back.
Comments continue below
re Twotanks | 9:31 a continued | 9:41 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Not only does the Contitution differ with your point of view, have you never
heard of the events at
Trolley Square or the University back east where about 100 students were killed?
This judge put students at risk at the University of Utah, he violated his oath to uphold the constitution.
Need I say more?
Trolley Square or the University back east where about 100 students were killed?
This judge put students at risk at the University of Utah, he violated his oath to uphold the constitution.
Need I say more?
here we go again.... | 9:44 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
This is just a preview of what Utah can expect from the honorable senator
Buttars. Congratulations to the citizens of West Jordan for re-electing this
fine gentleman.
Jimbo | 9:50 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
To BYU Law Student:
Go back to class. We are not a "Democracy". We are a republic. Utah's constitution is not a "Democracy". This is how the balance of powers works. The Gov nominated and the Senate (The People Spoke). If the the majority of the people feel their State Reps misrepresented them, then they should contact that Rep and vote smart next time. This is a victory for our democratic republic! It works. Hit the book big boy. "... the world if full of educated derelects".
Go back to class. We are not a "Democracy". We are a republic. Utah's constitution is not a "Democracy". This is how the balance of powers works. The Gov nominated and the Senate (The People Spoke). If the the majority of the people feel their State Reps misrepresented them, then they should contact that Rep and vote smart next time. This is a victory for our democratic republic! It works. Hit the book big boy. "... the world if full of educated derelects".
re re BYU Law Student (8:45 am) | 9:52 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Hold on, I'm confused. Wouldn't the right to keep and
"bare" arms kind of go against the idea of concealing the weapon? You
sure you know where your gun is?
Unfit | 9:54 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Judge Hilder is not only unfit for the move up, but unfit to remain a judge. The
Constitution is not subject to the whims of judges (or lawyers) but they are
subject to the Constitution.
The right of the People to bear arms shall not be infringed is the Supreme law of the land and is not debatable. To even take the University case at all is an indication of legal malfeasance. This man like so many others are unfit to serve when they cannot grasp the idea that their power is limited to obeying and defending the Constitution. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is unambiguous.
Legislators who are sick and tired of liberal judges need only look at the laws on the books that they have created and given to these lawyers and judges to argue indefinitely for the purposes of getting gain.
All branches of government to a greater or lessor degree have contributed to making a mockery of the basic concept of securing life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness within the bounds of the Constitution and moral law.
The right of the People to bear arms shall not be infringed is the Supreme law of the land and is not debatable. To even take the University case at all is an indication of legal malfeasance. This man like so many others are unfit to serve when they cannot grasp the idea that their power is limited to obeying and defending the Constitution. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is unambiguous.
Legislators who are sick and tired of liberal judges need only look at the laws on the books that they have created and given to these lawyers and judges to argue indefinitely for the purposes of getting gain.
All branches of government to a greater or lessor degree have contributed to making a mockery of the basic concept of securing life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness within the bounds of the Constitution and moral law.
Jimbo | 10:00 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
P.S. To BYU Law Student:
I want to add that I concur with you on the Senates vote to reject the judge's nomination on the grounds he disregarded the constituion in his previous rulings (right to bear arms). It is important to define our government as a republic or democratic republic. You are probably aware of that fact but so many Americans are ignorant of this and it is a KEY distinction! You would get an F on that test if I were your professor based on your statement in spite of our agreement on the issue of "Arms".
I want to add that I concur with you on the Senates vote to reject the judge's nomination on the grounds he disregarded the constituion in his previous rulings (right to bear arms). It is important to define our government as a republic or democratic republic. You are probably aware of that fact but so many Americans are ignorant of this and it is a KEY distinction! You would get an F on that test if I were your professor based on your statement in spite of our agreement on the issue of "Arms".
Bottom Line | 10:05 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
This judge doesn't uphold The Constitution. That SHOULD keep him from
getting the position. So what if he is praised for his "work ethic,
fairness and intelligence." We can find somebody better who is all of these
things, as well as upholds our Constitution. Why do we accept settling for less?
re Jimbo | 9:50 a.m. | 10:05 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
"Go back to class. We are not a "Democracy". We are a
republic".
A Republic IS a Democracy. A republic is an indirect form of Democracy.
Our system is both, direct and indirect.
we do have the initiative process whereby citizens can vote on laws, this is our direct form of Democracy.
I am not meaning to play gotcha, but what you are saying about Democracy and our form of government is incorrect.
A Republic IS a Democracy. A republic is an indirect form of Democracy.
Our system is both, direct and indirect.
we do have the initiative process whereby citizens can vote on laws, this is our direct form of Democracy.
I am not meaning to play gotcha, but what you are saying about Democracy and our form of government is incorrect.
to re BYULaw845 | 10:07 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
You have no right to bare your arms unless they are attractive arms.
Another opinion | 10:26 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
The Senate has the responsibility to confirm any appointment to the Utah
appellate courts. I would presume that none of us would want the Senate to close
its eyes and rubber stamp every candidate.
Appellate court judges can have a huge impact on the law. Statutes cannot and do not cover all possible contingencies. They must be construed in the light of the fact pattern presented. Likewise common law is judge made law and is (for the most part) completely under the control of the courts with minimal legislative intervention.
I have no experience with Judge Hilder so I cannot comment on his qualifications. However, the Senate must take these matters seriously and do their due diligence. If they do not like his decisions (or decision), his temperament, his supporters and fear that his impact will be negative (from their perspective) then rejection is the correct decision.
You may not agree with them but the Senate did what it is charged to do.
Appellate court judges can have a huge impact on the law. Statutes cannot and do not cover all possible contingencies. They must be construed in the light of the fact pattern presented. Likewise common law is judge made law and is (for the most part) completely under the control of the courts with minimal legislative intervention.
I have no experience with Judge Hilder so I cannot comment on his qualifications. However, the Senate must take these matters seriously and do their due diligence. If they do not like his decisions (or decision), his temperament, his supporters and fear that his impact will be negative (from their perspective) then rejection is the correct decision.
You may not agree with them but the Senate did what it is charged to do.
BYU Law Student | 10:27 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Jimbo,
I didn't say we were a "Democracy." I said we were a little d "democracy" meaning a government where the people are sovereign. You may have given me an F, but I'm pretty sure a real professor would have caught that distinction. Plus, with the discussion being about whether the Senate properly acted in this case instead of on the nuances of forms of constitutional government, doesn't an F seem a little harsh? I still think I nailed the bulk of the answer to deserve at least a C-. But oh well, I guess this "big boy" needs to go "hit the book" some more because I obviously have no clue what I'm talking about. Maybe I should have gone to the U instead, but then I wouldn't have been able to bring my gun with me to class.
I am also glad that I'm not the only one who caught the "bare" thing.
I didn't say we were a "Democracy." I said we were a little d "democracy" meaning a government where the people are sovereign. You may have given me an F, but I'm pretty sure a real professor would have caught that distinction. Plus, with the discussion being about whether the Senate properly acted in this case instead of on the nuances of forms of constitutional government, doesn't an F seem a little harsh? I still think I nailed the bulk of the answer to deserve at least a C-. But oh well, I guess this "big boy" needs to go "hit the book" some more because I obviously have no clue what I'm talking about. Maybe I should have gone to the U instead, but then I wouldn't have been able to bring my gun with me to class.
I am also glad that I'm not the only one who caught the "bare" thing.
@TwoTanks | 10:30 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Get over yourself Eurotrash. The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed in
our constitution. A fact that was recently affirmed by the US Supreme Court.
buttershypocrite | 10:53 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Butters is the ultimate hypocrite. Did you hear him on his high horse lecturing
someone who probably has 4 times the years of education about there only being
�one sovereign� in the state of Utah.
Does anyone think Butters would spew the same horse excrement at his sacrament
meeting? As for all of you gun lovers, please look at the statistics, by
bringing a gun into your environment you are much more likely to have a family
member commit suicide, shoot another family member, or your kid and another kind
in the neighborhood shoot each other before you would ever have the need to
brandish it in self defense, so be my guest, bring as many guns as you can into
your world, because statistically, there will be fewer of you and your kind
around if you do so.
re buttershypocrite | 10:53 a.m | 11:16 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Say what you want about Butters, but there is a saying in Russia that perhaps is
appropriate in this instance.
Even a broken clock gives the correct time twice a day.
This judge from all accounts is a decent person and an otherwise fine judge, but he is unwilling to uphold the 2nd ammendment.
Even a broken clock gives the correct time twice a day.
This judge from all accounts is a decent person and an otherwise fine judge, but he is unwilling to uphold the 2nd ammendment.
re buttershypocrite | 10:53 a.m | 11:29 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Buttars aside, having guns makes a family and individuals safer
IF
save gun handling procedures are observed.
If you go out to eat, and some bozo decides to shoot up the place you are not a sitting duck.
If you get a home invasion, you can defend yourself.
And now that this judges ruling is overturned, if someone walks into the U of U and decides to lock up a building so students can't escape, and then proceeds to try to kill scores of students, the students now have a way to defend themselves.
What this judge did may have been well intentioned, but it was poorly thought out, and almost as importantly it was against the oath of office he took to uphold the constitution.
IF
save gun handling procedures are observed.
If you go out to eat, and some bozo decides to shoot up the place you are not a sitting duck.
If you get a home invasion, you can defend yourself.
And now that this judges ruling is overturned, if someone walks into the U of U and decides to lock up a building so students can't escape, and then proceeds to try to kill scores of students, the students now have a way to defend themselves.
What this judge did may have been well intentioned, but it was poorly thought out, and almost as importantly it was against the oath of office he took to uphold the constitution.
Dumb Lawher | 11:52 a.m. Nov. 20, 2008
I'm one of the dumbest lawyers in the state, and my income proves it. I can
see where judicial "temperament" is crucial in a good trial judge. I
don't see that it makes any difference at all in an appellate judge who
spends his days reading appellate briefs and writing appellate opinions.
What's he going to do? Blow his stack in a meeting with the other judges
over an arcane legal theory?
Heaven forbid!
Butters is clueless.
Heaven forbid!
Butters is clueless.
buttershypocrite | 12:02 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
If you or you spouse or child is feeling depressed a gun is a good thin to have
around.
If there is a emotionally heated family argument a gun is a good thing to have around.
If you have a mischievous child in the house a gun is a good thing to have in the house.
Now ask yourself, how many times have you delt with the situations I just stated, and how many times you have been in your house and been the victim of a home invasion robbery, and how many times have you been in a college class (or any type of class if you don't like those snobby college intellectuals) when a gun toting lunitic barges in and locks the doors?
Again, I encourage all of you to obtain as many guns as you so desire, because there will be less of you after you do so.
If there is a emotionally heated family argument a gun is a good thing to have around.
If you have a mischievous child in the house a gun is a good thing to have in the house.
Now ask yourself, how many times have you delt with the situations I just stated, and how many times you have been in your house and been the victim of a home invasion robbery, and how many times have you been in a college class (or any type of class if you don't like those snobby college intellectuals) when a gun toting lunitic barges in and locks the doors?
Again, I encourage all of you to obtain as many guns as you so desire, because there will be less of you after you do so.
re buttershypocrite | 12:02 p.m | 12:17 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
"If you or you spouse or child is feeling depressed a gun is a good thin to
have around".
What you say is not totally without merit, however suicide existed before guns.
There are pills, cars, knives,suicide by cop etc.
In the end it is a choice to have a gun.
If guns are respected and handled using safe procedures, they are quite safe, but as with anything there are exceptions.
Personally I do have guns, I enjoy them, and after Trolley Square, I got the carry permit.
If I ever get the chance to defend you from someone who would take your life I will do it, and if you want to thank me, I will be glad to accept your thank you.
What you say is not totally without merit, however suicide existed before guns.
There are pills, cars, knives,suicide by cop etc.
In the end it is a choice to have a gun.
If guns are respected and handled using safe procedures, they are quite safe, but as with anything there are exceptions.
Personally I do have guns, I enjoy them, and after Trolley Square, I got the carry permit.
If I ever get the chance to defend you from someone who would take your life I will do it, and if you want to thank me, I will be glad to accept your thank you.
Box Elder County Courts | 12:21 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
The Prosecutors do not protect innocent people.
You are doomed and the Judges and Attorneys are not Law Educated at all.
The Judges are mis Conduct individuals and the Conduct Comission does nothing to grade Conduct.
Ben Hadfield claims he has the comissions blessing
God for bid
All of these people are failed lawyers
You are doomed and the Judges and Attorneys are not Law Educated at all.
The Judges are mis Conduct individuals and the Conduct Comission does nothing to grade Conduct.
Ben Hadfield claims he has the comissions blessing
God for bid
All of these people are failed lawyers
Conservative Lawyer | 1:55 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
As a conservative (which, in times past, meant Republican) attorney, I too am
upset about the Senate's refusal to confirm Judge Hilder. I have appeared
before in numerous cases and he has always been fair, reasoned, and of a proper
judicial temperament. The Utah Senate's actions are inexcusable; judicial
confirmations should not be based exclusively on political leanings... Shame on
those who voted against Judge Hilder...
re Conservative Lawyer | 1:55 p | 2:03 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
You've convinced me, I'd want to have this guy for a neighboor and
perhaps a friend.
Yet the oath of office doesn't require adherance to judicial temperment or being a "swell guy".
the oath of office of a judge requires that he adhere to the constitution.
You may (or may not be) a good lawyer, but I have yet to see you make a good arguemnt why this judge ought to be promoted.
Yet the oath of office doesn't require adherance to judicial temperment or being a "swell guy".
the oath of office of a judge requires that he adhere to the constitution.
You may (or may not be) a good lawyer, but I have yet to see you make a good arguemnt why this judge ought to be promoted.
Robin | 3:06 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
His lack of concern for the well being of the family is a real issue despite his
blended marriage. He was directly responsible for the suicide death of a father
he had sentenced to 30 days jail to make an impression? Probation was a viable
option especially since he admitted fault outright. What a jerk, to claim he
suffered from his father's suicide. He learned nothing about caring only
an Oedipus complex.
why was he rejected? | 3:22 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Why was Hilder rejected? The senators' constituents were raging mad NRA
members that were mobilized to speak out against this nomination. The senators
want to do what their constituents want, but they also know that under the law,
senators cannot reject an appointment on the basis of a judge's political
views or leanings. So what comes first--representing your constituents or
following the law?
Senators know that following the law comes first, and that the only way they could legally reject him was to find that he was unfit. The only straw they had to make this finding was a day of testimony where the judge was flustered by questions from legislators who wanted to do everything they could to get this guy rejected. They also built their case for temperment on people who came out on the losing end of Hilder's judgments.
So you base a person's temperment on his reaction to questions by his enemies and by those who lost their cases, and you ignore the overwhelming evidence of reviews from persons who regularly appear in his courtroom. The only comparable farce I can think of is the Jews' trial of Jesus.
Senators know that following the law comes first, and that the only way they could legally reject him was to find that he was unfit. The only straw they had to make this finding was a day of testimony where the judge was flustered by questions from legislators who wanted to do everything they could to get this guy rejected. They also built their case for temperment on people who came out on the losing end of Hilder's judgments.
So you base a person's temperment on his reaction to questions by his enemies and by those who lost their cases, and you ignore the overwhelming evidence of reviews from persons who regularly appear in his courtroom. The only comparable farce I can think of is the Jews' trial of Jesus.
HaHaHa | 8:23 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Now that our senators have discovered their dislike for bad tempers I hope they
are strong enough to hold themselves up to the same standards.
I can hardly wait to see them create ethics rules for politicians. HaHaHa
I can hardly wait to see them create ethics rules for politicians. HaHaHa
Disappointed | 10:31 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
Once again the Utah State Senate has given the State a black eye. To subject
someone to the cruel and invasive questioning that Judge Hilder endured is
unbelieveable.
No one without some legal training or experience should be allowed to sit in judgment of someone who is a trained legal professional. There are plenty of lawyers in the Senate, let them sit on the nominating committee.
Judge Hilder's temperment is one of the most consistently even and level. No one in his courtroom is demeaned or made to feel inadequate. He takes whatever time is necessary to hear from everyone. The Court of Appeals and the citizens of the State are the big losers here, but the current and future litigants who will appear before Judge Hilder are the winners.
No one without some legal training or experience should be allowed to sit in judgment of someone who is a trained legal professional. There are plenty of lawyers in the Senate, let them sit on the nominating committee.
Judge Hilder's temperment is one of the most consistently even and level. No one in his courtroom is demeaned or made to feel inadequate. He takes whatever time is necessary to hear from everyone. The Court of Appeals and the citizens of the State are the big losers here, but the current and future litigants who will appear before Judge Hilder are the winners.
Blown Away | 11:52 p.m. Nov. 20, 2008
In looking at this article and the comments that have come as a result, it
appears as though the main concern for those who support the senate's
decision to reject Judge Hilder is support of the 2nd Amendment and the US
Constitution.
I couldn't agree more that the constitution is the most important law in the land. And if this played any part in Hilder's 2003 ruling, these people may have a point. But as anyone who's read Hilder's decision will attest, the case in question was over a very narrow statute that didn't touch constitutional rights and the right to bare arms. Hilder noted this in his decision and left the door open for the state legislature to re-write these laws, which it did a short time later.
To say that judges have power to make and change laws, as Buttars claims, is clearly not the case, whch was proven by the legislature's quick re-write of a state statute. And their rejecting Hilder for forcing such a re-write is their way of affirming that it is they, and only they, who have any say in how this state is governed. Point taken fellas. But at what cost?
I couldn't agree more that the constitution is the most important law in the land. And if this played any part in Hilder's 2003 ruling, these people may have a point. But as anyone who's read Hilder's decision will attest, the case in question was over a very narrow statute that didn't touch constitutional rights and the right to bare arms. Hilder noted this in his decision and left the door open for the state legislature to re-write these laws, which it did a short time later.
To say that judges have power to make and change laws, as Buttars claims, is clearly not the case, whch was proven by the legislature's quick re-write of a state statute. And their rejecting Hilder for forcing such a re-write is their way of affirming that it is they, and only they, who have any say in how this state is governed. Point taken fellas. But at what cost?
BEENTHERB4 | 1:06 a.m. Nov. 22, 2008
I AM SAD. I THINK HILDER IS A REMARKABLE JUDGE
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Robert Hilder
- Oden hurt, done for season? 12:56 a.m.
- USU home-court streak ends 12:55 a.m.
- USU names field after Merlin Olsen 12:52 a.m.
- Utes stop Idaho State 12:51 a.m.
- Y., U. to learn bowl destinations 12:49 a.m.
- Utes' team staying well-tuned 12:48 a.m.
- Kirilenko sits, Miles improves 12:47 a.m.
- BYU basketball: Cougars crush Dons 12:38 a.m.
- Kirilenko will not play tonight 12:34 a.m.
- Surprise job comeback 12:33 a.m.
- Why is Y. ignoring spew of hatred?
309 - Letters: Liberal because LDS247
- Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing195
- Hate not limited to 1 in-state rivalry189
- Aggies shoot past Cougars179
- N.Y. Senate rejects gay marriage128
- Unbeaten BYU takes trip to Logan105
- George lost in rivalry hatefest104
- Harpring's NBA career is over94
- Ed Smart 'appalled' at testimony90
Trolley Square's annual Holiday Open House will feature visits with...
That does it — I'm having an affair! Thanks to Tiger Woods, David...
First, a big thank you to all who posted questions here for me to ask...
Latest comments
The Las Vegas Bowl is going to pass on BYU and take Utah. They are not...
I'd like to thank all the single fathers out there who do all they can for...
I agree with most of the poll questions, also. They failed to mention all the...
CNN is a pretty conservative network, actually. Just b/c FOX news exists,...
I just returned today from Pearl Harbor. I passed on seeing the Arizona...
He took no guff from anyone. i loved him
I think trax is a good step... but am looking forward to more mass transit...
Actually most Utah fans prior to this season knew that we would be rebuilding...
Williams want to be an all star he should play like one night in night out....
I totally agree with the whole article. I put leaves in a compost box and...
Advertisements
*********
You may think this, but the Constitution of the United States, begs to differ.