Two or Three (.net)

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. - Jesus

4.19.2005

What Liberals Want (and Why Judicial Confirmations Matter)

by Tom Parsons [+/-] show/hide

John Hinderaker of Power Line has an excellent column today for The Weekly Standard on what the Left is attempting to accomplish through judicial activism and the effect that those efforts would have on the Constitution as we know it. His column only confirms the critical nature of the looming battle over judicial nominess. It's time to put an end to filibusters and move forward on these nominations in the Senate.

posted by Tom Parsons at 10:35 AM 3 comments

3 Comments:

  • Umm, last I checked, it was the conservatives who were shopping around for an "activist ruling" (in the Schiavo case), not the liberals. I also don't see too many conservatives whining about Bush v. Gore 2000, an activist ruling if ever there was one.

    I've long held that an "activist judge" simply means "any judge who rules in a way that conservatives don't like."

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4/19/2005 1:09 PM  

  • Please explain how upholding the Florida Constitution was an "activist ruling."

    And Conservatives didn't do a very good job of shopping in the Schiavo case if they were trying.

    It's funny that as you talk about conservatives calling judges activists simply for disagree with them, you point to an instance where you disagree with the court therefore they are activist.

    No, actually my definition of an activist judge is basically one that does not interpret the Constitution but rather appeals to "evolving standards of morality" or "international law and opinion" while finding hidden rights buried in the Constitution that no one knew was there.

    But regardless of whether I disagree with you or not tigirsch, I am glad you are here to discuss this. I enjoy engaging people who disagree with me. Thanks for stopping by, come back anytime.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 4/19/2005 2:07 PM  

  • This is the main rift between "strict consitutionalists" and "living document liberals" - as Justice Scalia is fond of remarking:

    "The Constitution is not a living organism, for Pete’s sake; it’s a legal document and like all legal documents, it says some things and it doesn’t say others.”

    By Blogger danielg, at 4/19/2005 2:39 PM  

Post a Comment