In essence, you're saying, 'They're not making mistakes. It's malice.' If your decision is based on incorrect data, you have no backing for that decision. It ma

In essence, you're saying, 'They're not making mistakes. It's malice.' If your decision is based on incorrect data, you have no backing for that decision. It may be true to say that some judges are such partisan hacks that they would rule the way they did regardless of the information, but we should demand better. >The review found an error in a landmark ruling, Shelby County v. Holder, which struck down part of the Voting Rights Act. Chief Justice John Roberts used erroneous data to make claims about comparable rates of voter registration among blacks and whites in six southern states. >In another case, Justice Anthony Kennedy falsely claimed that DNA analysis can be used to identify individual suspects in criminal cases with perfect accuracy. This cannot be viewed as acceptable. This cannot be viewed as, 'Oh, well, they would have found a reason to rule that way anyway.' SC judges are not your (general 'your') drunk uncle, who has a right to be a buffoon unless he's hurting someone. When SC judges are buffoons, they will absolutely cause damage.