4 ms·
> For the purposes of law we do No we don't. That's why we have judges
by circlefavshape 8y ago
> For the purposes of law we do
No we don't. That's why we have judges
- scarface74 8y agoAnd judges never give out different sentences based race or affluence....
- reaperducer 8y agoIs squirrel a race now?
- scarface74 8y agoNo but the person going in front of the judge is where the less clear the law is, the more of a chance for bias.
- ozzmotik 8y agosure if you mean it by the old sense of a species (cf. the human race)
- shliachtx 8y agoJudges are not lawmakers. They serve to interpret the laws accurately. Of course, often the laws are not codified very specifically, so it is left to judges to interpret it as straightforwardly as possible.