The application of the term to lawyers and judges most often occurs when defence lawyers representing criminals use questionable, specious and dishonest tactics in the courtroom to get their clients acquitted, or when corrupt judges, based on political and ideological reasons and personal feelings (such as in [[Dred Scott v. Sandford]], [[Abington School District v. Schempp]], [[Roe v. Wade]] and [[Obergefell v. Hodges]]) instead of adhering to federal, state or local laws, engage in [[judicial activism]], illegally attempt to legislate from the bench or otherwise play fast and loose with the law to suit their personal biases. | The application of the term to lawyers and judges most often occurs when defence lawyers representing criminals use questionable, specious and dishonest tactics in the courtroom to get their clients acquitted, or when corrupt judges, based on political and ideological reasons and personal feelings (such as in [[Dred Scott v. Sandford]], [[Abington School District v. Schempp]], [[Roe v. Wade]] and [[Obergefell v. Hodges]]) instead of adhering to federal, state or local laws, engage in [[judicial activism]], illegally attempt to legislate from the bench or otherwise play fast and loose with the law to suit their personal biases. |