Judicial debates in Fresno

Watch the video as candidates Lis Gamoian and Rachel Hill exchange verbal punches.

Posted in Uncategorized |

Water Bond Proposition

Is Proposition 1–the Water Quality, Supply and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014–really in the best interest of California’s taxpayers?

Watch this video, tell me what you think. I think there are too many unknowns in this proposition to be sure this will help us.

What do you think?

 

Posted in News Updates |

Voters vs Unions- Who should have more say in government?

When the people of the County of Ventura put together a ballot measure to save the County from bankruptcy, the DA and unions began to fight against the right of people to have a say in government.

But when the County is having trouble paying pensions for government employees, the system has to change. Read Stephen Frank’s article here.

Posted in Articles, News Updates | Tagged , , |

What you need to know about judicial activists or unqualified judges

Unfortunately, many judges sitting on California courts may be incompetent, corrupt or lazy.

Even worse, many are political opportunists who have a political agenda. They are “judicial activists.”

Judicial activists legislate from the bench. Instead of strictly interpreting the law (strict constructionists), these judges make the laws. Rather than applying the law to facts, they impose their own values on us all.

Judicial activists have:

Overturned voter-passed initiatives and laws passed by the state legislature, simply because they personally have a different belief system. They twist the law to rationalize their decisions.
Imposed their own moral codes, political beliefs and secular values in an effort to reshape our society and promote social engineering. For example, the recent decision on homeschooling that criminalized homeschooling parents.

It is the voters of California and the legislatures that are supposed to make laws. Not judges. In fact, these judges ignore the law in favor of their own liberal, left-wing, anti-family agendas.

Superior Court Judicial Primary candidates
on JudgeVoterGuide.com were selected on whether
a candidate is a strict constructionist…
and rejects judicial activism.

JudgeVoterGuide.com ranks every aspect of a judge’s record on a scale of 1 (most activist) to 10 (most strict constructionist). Nothing is overlooked, from a judge’s rulings, to on-the-record statements to American Bar Association ratings. We also look at their stated positions and contributions as well as who’s endorsing them.

Finally, each candidate’s career is considered from a bird’s eye view. Experience. Integrity. Commitment to community.

Each judicial recommendation on JudgeVoterGuide.com has passed these benchmarks:

  • Tough on crime
  • Well-qualified, fair and experienced
  • Maintains a high degree of integrity
  • Most importantly, rejects judicial activism and will not legislate from the bench

Why is judicial activism so destructive to our community?

The proper role of a judge is to fairly interpret the law to the facts of a particular case in order to arrive at a fair judgment. But that is not happening today in many courts.

Instead, activist judges have been advancing a liberal activist agenda that:

Destroys the separation of powers
Weakens the structure of federalism
Favors the criminal over the victim
Usurps the right of the people to govern themselves
Is soft on crime and sentencing
Undermines protection of religious freedoms and First Amendment rights
Seeks to impose humanism, multiculturalism, relativism and internationalism on us, regardless of the people’s will
Is biased against free enterprise and is antigrowth—resulting in higher taxes and less opportunity for our future
Unfairly shifts current city zoning, hurting churches, home owners and businesses. For example, church expansions are often denied. And eminent domain is used against churches and small businesses.

Pure and simple, it’s politics from the bench

To view the questionaire we send to candidates, click here.

To view our full ratings for each candidate, click here.

Posted in News Updates |

California Supreme Court refused to help taxpayers on probable stem-cell fraud

The California Supreme Court has refused to review two lawsuits challenging the $3 billion Stem Cell Institute passed by voters with Proposition 71.

The decision was largely political, by the activist judges. The suits claimed there was inadequate state supervision and that taxpayers would be harmed by the conflict of interest that will enrich a few at the expense of the taxpayers.

 

 

Pure and simple, it’s politics from the bench

We are researching the candidates very carefully. We have talked to many on the phone, and will try to talk to all of them. We have evaluated their rulings, who appointed them, their endorsements and other criteria.

As the election approaches, we will make our recommendations.

Posted in News Updates |