Originally Posted by
striker42
It's not naieve at all. One of the things an attorney is trained to do is divorce their personal feelings from an issue, see every side of an argument, and know what the strongest arguments are.
A judge is supposed to be a neutral decision maker who can take that objective view, decide what the best argument is, and so state what the law is.
To put it simply, a judge determines what the law is, a legislator determines what the law should be.
However, we pick SCOTUS judges who are the most partisan we can find and so who refuse to approach the case objectively. But the system is set up that way.