my default position on any Federal judge who's been on the bench for more than 5 years is "they're a good judge"... or, perhaps more accurately, "they're not a bad judge". I believe completely in the separation of powers as defined in the U.S. Constitution, and the Judicial branch is really the only place where collusion is completely unaccepted. (The Executive and Legislative make back door deals all the time, but judges are the ones who are by definition there to referee all that.) The Judicial branch has a pretty good self-policing process for weeding out the incompetent and/or dishonest, and they tend to clean house quickly when a bad egg is found.
Unless proven otherwise, therefore, I assume that judges will always apply the law fairly (as they understand the law.) The trick is knowing which way the judge in question will lean based on their own philosophy and interpretation of the applicable laws.
Based on prior rulings, this judge apparently has a thing against overreaching governmental agencies. A very good philosophy to have. :)
I have a social disorder (although it's not quite full blown Asperger's), and can come across differently than intended...if you're offended by something I've said, I probably didn't mean it with such animosity - please take it with a grain of salt. :)
