[« While it would fit me to a T....] [Thought for the Day: »]
04/19/2005: Judicious Activism
This falls into the If You Were Ever Wondering About this One category related to the 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bush v Gore and that touch of Judicious Activism
From the NY Times editorial pages is this article: Psst...Justice Scalia...You Know, You're an Activist Judge, Too by Adam Cohen:
.The classic example of conservative inconsistency remains Bush v. Gore. Not only did the court's conservative bloc trample on the Florida state courts and stop the vote counting - it declared its ruling would not be a precedent for future cases. How does Justice Scalia explain that decision? In a recent New Yorker profile, he is quoted as saying, with startling candor, that "the only issue was whether we should put an end to it, after three weeks of looking like a fool in the eyes of the world." That, of course, isn't a constitutional argument - it is an unapologetic defense of judicial activism.
When it comes to judicial activism, conservative judges are no better than liberal ones - and, it must be said, no worse. If conservatives are going to continue their war on the judiciary, though, they should be honest. They do not want to get rid of judicial activists, a standard that would bring down even Justice Scalia. They want to rid the courts of judges who disagree with them.
Karen on 04.19.05 @ 04:33 AM CST
