We cannot avoid unpleasant facts forever. So, not only do the lawyers become judges but they thereafter scandalize the world (the non-lawyer world anyway; lawyers know more than they can tell).
Perhaps it is all an accident [somewhat like a wardrobe malfunction]; perhaps it is badness or the corruption of power. Who is to say?
Time, maybe, to look to Cardinal Charoni di Tempranillo for a cool sceptical attitude to these events. Although tolerant, he would surely advert to the counterfeit aspect of some judges.
But, you say, the US Supreme Court judges have grasped to their robed bosoms the fakery of a male Judge Judy. How can the counterfeit be false if it is endorsed by the Court, despite his being âroughed upâ?, as the press put it?
In truth, the acceptance of the case for consideration by the Supreme Court reveals the real problem. It is a representative court, infected with the preposterous notion that only a socially sanctioned procedure (litigation) can be the basis for the making, publically, of a moral judgment, exemplified by the fallacy that if Michael Mukasy does not define torture the US cannot be condemned for the use of torture.