According to Judicial Watch (Hat Tip: CQ) Judge Taylor was a major player in an organization which donated 45,000 to the plaintiff in the case. Now I understand that judges can’t be removed for having ideological views, but for some reason we say that jurors can’t. Lawyers don’t even have to spend one of their precious challenges to remove a juror who donated to the NRA in a gun case or to the KKK in a hate-crimes case. If you think opinions aren’t allowed in cases then be consistent. Get judges who don’t follow the news at all and only allow them to serve. Judge Taylor was not ethically over the line. In fact, she only revealed herself to generally agree with the ACLU a fact which was made obvious by her decision. A similar distinction seems to be made with journalists and bloggers. News from the internet is denounced as biased and unprofessional while the journalists who are overwhelmingly Democrats are as pure as the newly fallen snow. I have recently been looking at the Amar and Hirsch book on the Constitution. Although I disagree with most of the analysis, their section on the jury seems dead-on; except for some extreme bias (relative of party) unrelated to the issues no jury member should be kept off for any reason and especially they shouldn’t be kept off for no reason or because they belong to the wrong demographic.
Professionals don’t hide their biases.