Damn those activist judges! Damn them!

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
If the Court stated that the federal income tax was unconstitution,

It did, once upon a time. The nation followed by passing a specific constitutional amendment permit it.

Contrary to the implication of your statement, most judges try very hard to follow the law. But there are problems: What is an unreasonable search? What punishments are cruel and unusual?

[Bosh]

Originally posted by flash9286
But even that one wouldnt be very good, since everybody has different opinons on what constiutes activism.

Then isn't it rather silly for conservatives to shout themselves hoarse complaining about how liberal judges are so activist?

Yes, since there's no correlation between activism and striking down laws.

Then what, pray tell, does it correlate with?

It seems more and more that judicial activism is being used as nothing more than "judifying that I don't like" which is meaningless...

[flash9286]

Originally posted by Bosh

Then isn't it rather silly for conservatives to shout themselves hoarse complaining about how liberal judges are so activist?

I totally agree.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No Kuci, KrazyHorse is right. What is constitutional is only what a majority of the Supreme Court says it is. You may have a different opinion, Hell, MOST people may have a different opinion, but on the issue of constitutionality, the current Supreme Court decides. A later Supreme Court may overturn or Congress and the states may pass a Constitutional Amendment, but it has no impact on what is constitutionally permitted here and now.

[Dinner]

The courts have struck down several of the religious right's sacred cows like school prayer and anti-abortion laws so they demonize judges and claim they are "activists" out to force everyone into accepting their interpritations. Yes, these same people ignore right wing judges who do the exact same thing dispite the fact that right wing judges do it far more then left wing judges.

[Patroklos]

Perhaps if you say it again Oerdin, and click your heels three times, it will be true.

[Sava]

actually, Oerdin is correct...

and he only needed to say it once

[Patroklos]

Well, if Sava agrees with him...

[Sava]

sure I do

I agree that 2+2=4

it is about facts...

[MrFun]

I love how some conservative Apolytoners are squirming and trying to backpedal now that the point of activist judges label can be just as easily pasted onto conservative judges as well as liberal judges.



"Oh, but THAT is different with conservative judges . . . . ."


"Oh, well, in THIS instance, there is a a subtle difference between what conservative judges have done compared to activist liberal judges . . . . . ."

[Sava]

exactly MrFun

or how some people are trying to pretend this is not an important point

[Patroklos]

No one has said it is different.

Those figure do not prove anything about the liberal judges either, other than the simple but useless fact that it states.

I would say it is pretty pathetic that the usual suspects refuse to interpret the data.

For instance, is it any more activist to strike down an constitutional law than to not strike down an unconstitutional law? No, and those numbers can't tell you anything about that.

Oerdin and Sava downgrade troll to 0.0/10

[DinoDoc]

I don't really see the big deal here. I think that it is good for conservatives to be reminded to be careful what they wish for. Their often-reflexive rhetoric praises "judicial restraint" and deference to almost unleashable powers of the elected branches of governments. The New London case was a sterling example of judicial restraint after all.

[RGBVideo]

Originally posted by Patroklos
0.1/10

All laws are created equal, right?

Is Patroklos becoming the new Giancarlo?

[MrFun]

Careful -- he might start dropping you from a helicopter.