For the first time of which I am aware we have a president that suggests the Constitution is not the standard on which to balance the scales of justice, rather one side of the scale needs to be weighed down with empathy. That's kind of elusive and open-ended isn't it?

I thought this was a Republic country based on the foundations of laws. How does one judge on empathy? Do they ignore the laws to make a judgement on what "feels good" to them?

The last word of Obama's statement is the revelatory cornerstone: "OUTCOMES". It is all about outcomes, not justice under the constitution with regard to human liberty. He wants a judge who will base decisions on a subjective standard of empathy, which minimizes responsibility, maximizes a contrived and unfair equality of outcomes, and places a fascist judicial system that regards the rights of individuals below the whims of the state's definition of fairness.

"...elusive and open-ended"? Perhaps, but I find Obama's statements anti-Constitution and therefore un-American. But it *sounds so good*. We can be certain that there will be no literalists among his choices.

Would that not be interesting if someone in the court was having a bad morning while judging an important case?