Within the guild, disagreeing with judicial decisions is a staple of our existence. We dispute them in motions, briefs, memoranda and, occasionally, on a blawg. Rarely, however, is a judge attacked for being disingenuous in the motivations leading to the decision. Sure, there is pro-police bias. Sure, there is anti-minority bias, explicit or implicit. But rarely the rank politicization of the judiciary.
Until now. Mark DeGirolami has written an op-ed for the Weekly Standard claiming that the blight of “fake news” has now reached the bench, coining a new usage: Fake Law.
Something ugly is happening to the First Amendment. It is being contorted to enable judges to protest Donald Trump’s presidency. The perennial impulse of judges to manipulate the law to achieve morally and politically desirable ends has only been exacerbated by the felt necessity to “resist” Trump. The result: Legal tests concerning the freedoms of speech and religion that in some cases were already highly dubious are being further deformed and twisted.
Welcome to the rise of fake law.
DeGirolami extends the fake news phenomenon from the spin fed us by self-righteous journalists to make sure that our news sources lead inexorably to the “right” conclusions to the motivations of judges. Continue reading

