US Supreme Court
Will put it back soon. Need to restore from backup.
R9GjJA Thanks again for the post.Really thank you! Keep writing.
I posted this to get to the heart of the matter on Sotomayor and the lively discussion regarding her nomination.
I think it would behoove all of us to properly define what exactly an "activist judge" is. I would define an activist judge as one who does not follow the law and legal precedent when making a legal determination. Rather, such a judge would substitute what they think the law should be rather than what it is. However, there is a caveat.
A judge on the Supreme Court need not follow precedent, as bad precedent needs to be overturned. A district court or appeals court judge does need to follow any precedent, regardless of how wrong that precedent is. IIRC, Gonzalez v. Carhart was a model for how judges should act: district and appeals courts struck down the law banning partial birth abortion based on precedent and the law. The Supreme Court then changed the precedent.
Please offer up your own definitions of an activist judge and whether or not you'd agree that courts inferior to the Supreme Court are beholden to bad precedent.
hXWfCP Awesome article post.Much thanks again. Awesome.
ErmfjZ Very good blog.Really looking forward to read more. Really Cool.
Ender's video which featured the former Clinton supporter indirectly reminded me of the topic of judicial appointments and its effect on voters.
A common argument for McCain that has been used to shore up his support among the base is that he will appoint strict constructionist judges in the mold of Antonin Scalia while Obama will try to pack the court with far left ideologues. That, in and of itself, is a good enough reason to pull the lever for McCain, regardless of what views he may have on other issues. Indeed, a McCain presidency could finally be what overturns Roe v. Wade. Lets take a moment to dissect these arguments.
ax37ve I really enjoy the post.Much thanks again. Really Great.
Wh6rrM Great, thanks for sharing this blog article.Thanks Again. Awesome.
zACYTt I really liked your article post.Really looking forward to read more. Great.
The Supreme Court recently heard a challenge to the DC handgun ban in a case that has the potential to definitively clarify the Second Amendment , which states:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
There has been a long-standing debate between gun rights activists and gun control advocates as to whether this describes an individual right or whether it applies only in the context of a regulated militia. The ruling is not expected until June, but based on questioning before the Court, it appears likely that a majority of Justices will rule that the DC ban is unconstitutional.
LR2ahU Very good post.Really thank you! Really Great.
Hat tip to Tyler Cowen .
Tyler comments on a post by Megan McCardle at the Atlantic about what the legal ramifications should be for drug companies' products that pass the FDA approval process. Megan's commentary was, in turn, prompted by a post by Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly .
Starting with Drum:
nrcMJt Thanks-a-mundo for the post.Much thanks again. Really Great.
q2L95k Awesome article.Thanks Again. Really Cool.