The judge is supposed to be impartial and rule on each case individually.

If you study that case, what you find is a judge doing his level best to discern the rule of law.

Meles is not the judge in this case.

A judge can't have any preferred outcome in any particular case. The judge's only obligation - and it's a solemn obligation - is to the rule of law.

No one should read into that that she couldn't be impartial as a judge when deciding issues relating to the executive branch or any other matter.

He did what a judge should do — not give any indication on any specific case or how he might look at that because if he does, he's not going to be the impartial arbiter a judge should be,