Charles T. Canady
American politician and judge
Charles Terrance Canady (June 22 1954) is an American attorney and judge serving on the Supreme Court of Florida since 2008, and has been its chief justice since July 1, 2018. He previously served a two-year term as chief justice from 2010 to 2012. Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court, Canady was a judge on Florida's Second District Court of Appeal from 2002 to 2008, and a Republican member of the United States House of Representatives from 1993 to 2001.
Quotes
edit- The Civil Rights Act of 1997 is simple, direct, and clear: it prohibits federal government discrimination and preferences on the basis of race and sex. Most of the arguments against this legislation are anything but simple, direct, and clear; they do not specifically address the simple issue of whether federal government preferences on the basis or race and sex are wise policies consistent with American legal and moral principles.
- The Civil Rights Act of 1997 (December 1, 1997)
- When the government grants preferences on the basis of race, it teaches the people that discrimination is acceptable. Our laws must reflect the principle that the government discrimination on the basis of race or sex is not to be tolerated. Americans look to our government to exemplify what is right and just. So long as the federal government recognizes people as unequal under the law, we cannot achieve the fundamental truth the American people already know: we are all entitled to equal protection of the law. This legislation will ensure that the federal government leads the way in respecting this basic American principle.
- The Civil Rights Act of 1997 (December 1, 1997)
- It is no doubt true that in the administration of justice — whatever the context — the appearance of impartiality as well as its reality should always be our goal. Public confidence in the administration of justice necessarily depends on public understanding. All of this should virtually go without saying. Actions that create a perception of unfairness are to be avoided. But those who administer justice cannot be required to be the guarantor of the public perception of their work. Sometimes that perception is shaped largely by extraneous forces and circumstances that are beyond the control of those who administer justice. And I would suggest that it is a dangerous policy indeed to prohibit actions which the fair administration of justice in fact requires simply because some segment — however large — of the public judges those actions to be other than just. Adopting such a policy promises to reward those who seek to undermine the faithful administration of justice by false charges of unfairness.
