The judicial exercise of judgment with amendments is a protection put in place by the authors of the Constitution. Practicing restraint and dispassion to achieve adequate impartiality requires and requires self-discipline and candor about shared and non-shared viewpoints. These are the characteristics of judicial behavior that society expects and entrusts to a Court equipped with such jurisdictional power. The characteristics of Due Process are both bold and vague. When cases come before the Supreme Court, Due Process becomes a step-by-step reasoning involving inclusions and exclusions in the judicial process. Decisions regarding its implications and the protection of the law it requires are based on the will of the law and the rules that define it, not on hard-nosed judgment. In any case, the "due process of law" requires an evaluation based on a disinterested investigation conducted in a spirit of science, on a balanced order of facts exactly and fairly exposed, on the detached consideration of conflicting claims, on non-ad hoc and episodic judgments but duly attentive to reconciling the needs of both continuity and change in a progressive perspective