I’ve talked about my view that judges should interpret the law as written and not based on their own judgement or opinion. I found a teachable example in a WSJ report on the Supreme Court’s ruling on an unusual murder retrial:

“When the jury was unable to return a verdict, the trial court properly declared a mistrial and discharged the jury,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote in a 10-page opinion. “As a consequence, the Double Jeopardy Clause does not stand in the way of a second trial on the same offenses.”

Non-controversial. And then:

“Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the dissenters, said the decision unfairly gave prosecutors a “second bite at the apple” because the jury “unmistakably announced acquittal” on the capital and first-degree murder charges. “That ought to be the end of the matter,” she wrote.”