I find it very scary when people don't understand the purpose of the court system. It happens when discussing Supreme Court rulings quite often. The court serves to interpret the constitutionality of the law, not the popularity or moral veracity of the law. The same misunderstanding happens on a local level. And I find it downright frightening that some people either mistakenly confuse or willfully ignore that prime difference.
So I was pretty frightened after reading a disturbing Letter to the Editor in the Dec. 9, 2006, Tracy Press.
Patricia Gomez, who wrote a letter to the editor, was "Surprised at the San Joaquin County Superior Court judge's ruling on Measure A because more than 2,500 Tracy residents want these sports fields now, not in 20 years."
The court's ruling against a developer deal that would have essentially exchanged sports fields for housing rights was based on the fact that the deal violated law. Popularity has nothing to do with it.
Judges rule on the legality of issues, and popular support for one side or the other (hopefully) has nothing to do with the final verdict.
Mrs. Gomez, it doesn't matter if you feel "No one can or will stop this community effort because it's that important."
No matter how many supporters line up behind this developer deal or how many people think it's important, it will still be illegal.