Sen. Coburn (R-OK) Admits Alito Legislated From The Bench
Sen. Coburn (R-OK) Admits Alito Legislated From The Bench
From NBC’s Meet the Press this morning:
RUSSERT: Do you believe Congress has the right to restrict the sale and transfer of machine guns or do you think that Judge Alito is correct that Congress should not be interfering in that?
SEN. TOM COBURN (R-OK): No, I think we probably have the right to do it. But I don’t think a judge has the right. That brings us back to the whole point. Those aren’t decisions judges should be making. Those are decisions legislatures should be making. That’s how we’ve gotten off on this track that we allowed judges to start deciding the law, new law, rather than interpret the law that the Congress — what should have napped this case is this is an area that’s up for debate and needs to go back to Congress. And if Congress decides that, then it should be there.
RUSSERT: So Judge Alito was wrong?
COBURN: Sure.
RUSSERT: And he was legislating?
COBURN: Sure.
We couldn’t agree more.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Better…
Flowers and candy is iraqi for IED.
November 6th, 2005 at 1:55 pmBeware of Greeks bearing gifts and Iraqis with flowers and candy…
November 6th, 2005 at 1:56 pm“We couldn’t agree more.”
Well Judd, I guess it’s pointless to mention what a hypocrite you/”we” are. You don’t seem to mind the Leftist judges legislating from the bench. You can make me eat those words by pointing me toward one of your editorials damning the 9th Circuit for one of their infamous legislation making decisions.
I won’t hold my breath.
November 6th, 2005 at 1:59 pmI won’t hold my breath.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
Please do, until we tell you to stop……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
November 6th, 2005 at 2:04 pmMan, this is sunday. Can’t we keep it light?
November 6th, 2005 at 2:05 pmIt’s wonderful when you corner a Republican, because then they start telling the truth.
November 6th, 2005 at 2:05 pmMan, this is sunday. Can’t we keep it light?
Comment by Average TV Viewer
I’m Jewish. I keep it light on Saturday.
November 6th, 2005 at 2:15 pmMagnum
I would say that when repugs say anything truthful it is an accident only, like when a baby dribbles food down it’s face. Not intentional but noticable.
November 6th, 2005 at 2:17 pmConservative judges are to jurisprudence what Lawrence Welk was to entertainment. Alito promises a generation of boring Sunday nights, cheesy patriotic production numbers, sappy rube-pleasing arrangements and pastel leisure suits…metaphorically speaking.
November 6th, 2005 at 2:20 pmI think I have vertigo.
It’s the same feeling I got when the wing nuts demanded that the federal courts and congress walk all over the state’s rights in the Schaivo case.
No wonder dubya’s a freaking idiot. These people will make you stupid.
New on EWM: “Operation Choke the Chickenâ€
DHS won’t be caught with its pants down by Avian Flu
November 6th, 2005 at 2:25 pmI’m Jewish. I keep it light on Saturday.
Well then yesterday, I would have said something like doesn’t Coburn cry when he masterbates?
November 6th, 2005 at 2:35 pmRepublicans and freakazoids like MizzIWrongY always project their own insecurities and failures on others. That’s what a psychopath always does…
We found that justices vary widely in their inclination to strike down Congressional laws. Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed by President George H. W. Bush, was the most inclined, voting to invalidate 65.63 percent of those laws; Justice Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Bill Clinton, was the least, voting to invalidate 28.13 percent. The tally for all the justices appears below.
Thomas 65.63 %
Kennedy 64.06 %
Scalia 56.25 %
Rehnquist 46.88 %
O’Connor 46.77 %
Souter 42.19 %
Stevens 39.34 %
Ginsburg 39.06 %
Breyer 28.13 %
One conclusion our data suggests is that those justices often considered more “liberal” – Justices Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens – vote least frequently to overturn Congressional statutes, while those often labeled “conservative” vote more frequently to do so. At least by this measure (others are possible, of course), the latter group is the most activist.
November 6th, 2005 at 2:51 pmRush Limb-Codone is always making the claim that everything “the libs” accuse republicans of doing is something that they themselves have done.
The fact is that the neo-cons do legislate from the bench, they just won’t admit it.
Strict constructionists are not textualists. They look to history and precedent as their guides for providing what the text itself does not.
In most cases, that points to an archaic era in which civil liberties, technology, and economic systems were far from what we expect today.
Scalia says that his purpose is to “preserve society’s values.”
Why should the common practices of the past have more authority than the common practice of today? Neither, in fact, is necessarily more correct than the other.
Justice Cardozo said it best “I take judge-made law as one of the existing realities of life…(but) judge-made law is secondary and subordinate to the law that is made by legislators.”
November 6th, 2005 at 3:10 pmSpeaking of GOP Senators…
November 6th, 2005 at 3:28 pmVA-Gov: GOP dirty tricks and election fraud. VA Voters Mind Your Vote!
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/6/121643/883
I do think its rather entertaining that Rush Limbo is still taken seriously. I was a counselor at a Methadone clinic and Oxycodone addiction was very prevalent. The personalities of those addicts were severely dysfunctional, even when they got off the Oxy. I also know that there is a percentage of people who cannot/will not ever get off the opiates. I always wonder how Rush’s detox went, and if he is now being maintained on Methadone. The opiate addict never forgets the high. Even is Rush is clean he is still technically an opiate addict in remission, which the everconstant chance he will relapse. It’s even more hysterical that he’s a Righty, loved by the far right. But it’s the usual hyprocracy in action. Rightys hate drug addicts and do not believe it is a disease, and will not fund drug treatment programs, and would rather jail addicts and throw away the key.
Any comments from the Right side of the gallery? So far no Rightys have even attempted to answer me.
P.S. Billy O’Reilly called me and tried to teach me how to use a vibrator.
November 6th, 2005 at 3:31 pm#14
These freaking republicans will stoop to new lows to retain power. We need to watch out for more of this underhanded kind of crap.
November 6th, 2005 at 3:36 pmVa is slipping from the republican ranks?
I’m not sure, but it wouldn’t be a good omen for the GOP.
November 6th, 2005 at 3:47 pm#14, 16 – i read the kos story and the flyer in question – other that the fact that it is misleading at face value, what about the statements of “where the canditates…stand on the issues” – those listed under Kaine, the good guy, don’t seem all that great…more lies?
November 6th, 2005 at 4:19 pmsorry this is off the thread topic, but very curious…
Want to know what’s wrong with America? Take a look at the latest headline on CNN:
“Prince Charles, Camilla attend church before theatre”
Who gives a fvck! Why is this news?
The only news regarding Prince Charles and Camilla (?) right now is the fact that instead of going to Rosa Parks funeral, George Bush went and had lunch with these pompus retards.
November 6th, 2005 at 4:20 pmSpudgeBoy,
CNN has been doing serious stories about Republican corruption. Watch the David Ensor pieces. I think it is hilarious AND even more devastating that casual stories about corruption are now as common as feel good stories. It’s only been this way for afew weeks.
November 6th, 2005 at 4:41 pmThere you go, SpudgeBoy. I was wondering how long it would be before you noticed Prince Charles and Camilla. Have you no shame? I mean, to say that “pompus retards” remark about Charlie and his punch? Of course, I have to agree that just because Bush is willing to conveniently set aside those “family values” to have lunch, I do have to ask myself how does he do it?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t the rightwingers and the Bushes in particular, ignoring their faith-based principles? I mean, how do they set aside their beliefs in the Ten mmandments about not committing adultery? or coveting the neighbor’s wife, his maidservants, and his ox and his asses and such? I mean, wasn’t Camilla Charlie’s ‘other woman’ and adulterer for many years while his wife was sent abroad so he could have a broad?
Charlie’s “family values” would fit right in, down at the bar with me and the boys. Evidently, so would Bush’s values, providing I could keep him from drinking up all the booze and blowing our chances with the broads down there.
November 6th, 2005 at 5:04 pm#15 Truth- your arguments are too powerful, too overwhelming to deal with…besides, it’s our stealth campaign to fit in with the tin-foil-hat protesters and welfare marchers. You win! You win, dammit! AHHHH…..
November 6th, 2005 at 5:23 pm(Marco torches a bong and staggers off to the park for a moveon.org picnic)
you trolls are slipping, troll answer #1 is always: “It’s Clintons fault”. Bottom line time folks is: “If bushie wants him in, it’s bad “. bushie won’t LEARN until we impeach him, and then he’ll blame someone else just like nixon.
November 6th, 2005 at 5:43 pmI book marked an article about Alito’s past. While 9 appeals Judges voted to award a woman damages for sexual harrassment in the workplace, Alito held out. He whined that companies never win sexual harrassment cases.
Alito would love to re-write the sexual harrassment laws so O’Scumbag can do his thing without having to pay restitution.
Do not confirm Alito, he hates women and he hates those who work.
November 6th, 2005 at 6:18 pm#15 Truth- your arguments are too powerful, too overwhelming to deal with…besides, it’s our stealth campaign to fit in with the tin-foil-hat protesters and welfare marchers. You win! You win, dammit! AHHHH…..
(Marco torches a bong and staggers off to the park for a moveon.org picnic)
Comment by Mark Marco — November 6, 2005
You know it. Just heard some pundit on ABC say that if the midterms were held today, repugs would lose both houses of Congress. Less than a year, pal. Less than a year. We’ll give you a head start. Start packing.
November 6th, 2005 at 7:12 pmI heard on a talk show today that several of Alito’s rulings were overturned when they reached the Supreme Court, with Sandra O’Connor voting with the majority to overturn. So this “centrist”’s rulings have been overturned by the person he’s supposed to replace! A moderate voice? Hardly.
November 6th, 2005 at 7:54 pmClub A Con, I read an article about the White Houses strategy to bring back the pug base in 06. Bushie is going to re-write the code.
They are delussional, nobody in this country will let Bushie touch anything as important as the tax code. (Just like we didn’t let him touch Social Security)
Another strategy is to let Rove and Rumsfeld go, they think that we will be satisfied with that, not.
BUSHIE IS A FAILURE AT EVERYTHING HE DOES, REAL AMERICANS KNOW THIS.
IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY NOW!
November 6th, 2005 at 7:59 pmOops, re-write the “tax” code.
November 6th, 2005 at 8:00 pm#21 Joe six pack. If your looking for action don’t take Charles or Bush along. Those to are both butt ugly and stupid, no (broads) will get close.. Go shopping alone to increase you sucess…..Blessings
November 6th, 2005 at 8:38 pm[...] To settle the issue once and for all about what constitutes “judicial activism”, I propose we do either of the following: stop talking about it as if it really exists; or finally—irrevocably define it as “any ruling made in a court of law that you personally don’t agree with”. Posted by Chris on Sunday, November 6th, 2005 at 10:35 pm. Filed under Social Justice , Republicans , Democrats [...]
November 6th, 2005 at 9:34 pmAnd all the chips fall now dont they?
Bathroom Review
November 7th, 2005 at 12:11 amRocketry
Well it was nice of Russert to get Coburn to say Alito was legislating from the bench. Score one for us.
Too bad, it seems that neither Coburn nor Russert understood Alito’s dissent was all about. The question was not about whether Congress could make legislation concerning the possion of machine guns, the issue is whether Congress could frame their legislation under the commerce clause.
Of the several articles I read, this from the http://www.freerepublic.com/^http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_86_4204714,00.html made it clearest for me.
” ‘Machine Gun Sammy,’ a perfect Halloween pick,” is how the Brady Campaign headlined President Bush’s latest Supreme Court nominee. But what the Brady activists failed to acknowledge is that Alito’s dissent in the 1996 case United States v. Rybar had nothing to do with a desire to legalize machine guns and everything to do with the judge’s determination to follow a Supreme Court precedent from the previous year.
In that earlier case, United States v. Lopez, the court overturned a federal law banning possession of guns within 1,000 feet of any school because the statute was an intrusion into states’ regulatory arena and utterly unrelated to interstate commerce. Congress had been steadily nationalizing local criminal codes for years, and the Supreme Court finally threw up its hands and said, “Halt!”
The Constitution doesn’t give the federal government the power to regulate every activity in this land, the court said. At the very least, Congress must establish some plausible link to interstate commerce.
In his Rybar dissent that is now being mocked, Alito faithfully tried to apply Lopez to a case involving the possession of machine guns. “Was United States v. Lopez a constitutional freak?” he wrote. “Or did it signify that the Commerce Clause still imposes some meaningful limits on congressional power?”
Meanwhile, not only did Alito point out how Congress might remedy the law’s fatal flaws, he also noted that the “Commerce Clause does not prevent the states from regulating machine gun possession, as all of the jurisdictions within our circuit have done.”
Alito didn’t favor legal machine guns. He favored abiding by the supreme law of this land.
November 7th, 2005 at 12:56 amhttp://www.AlGoreLabs.com
“Yes, I could get my Sleepytime Herbal Green Tea Infuser at Amazon, but until that Sharper Image dweeb or I invent a Star Trek transporter, there’s only so much you can get over the net, legally. Recently I discovered the concept of a strip mall. Now before you get all bent out of shape, it isn’t what I first thought. Damn. So this strip mall around the corner has a nail salon that I go to for my pedicures (Tuesday’s special $5 off!). Today I just noticed that they also wax and shave! Who needs Tipper to shave my back hair! :) I’m freeee! Wheee! No more breakfast in bed for her! Get your own grape nuts, woman! Bwahaha!â€
— President Al Gore
November 7th, 2005 at 2:34 amhttp://www.AlGoreLabs.com
Ah. The handy dandy Commerce Clause. It sure does come in handy! The recent Supreme Court decision regarding Medical Marajuana was also based on the Commerce Clause. Which still puzzles me, because the case was about the right to USE it, not the right to sell it. But the majority of those who depend upon it are terminal anyway, and the Supreme Court is FOREVER!!! And until the Right figures out how to profit from it and control it’s distribution, without their “base” freaking out…. And so we wait….
November 7th, 2005 at 3:13 amHas it occurred to any of the conservatives who pan over sites such as this one just how vacuous most (all?) liberals are? If you want genuine scholarship and insight, go to Townhall.com; at least there you’ll get some ideas thrown your way instead of the characteristic pablum spewing from the talentless eunuchs who (surprise, surprise) mindlessly reiterate whatever their equally mindless white, female instructors serve up at some east-coast quasi-university.
Its just a thought.
November 7th, 2005 at 6:00 amI’ll bet you self-flagellate after you tearfully masterbate, too, bk.
November 7th, 2005 at 7:43 amtalentless eunuchs
Eunichs ain’t what they used to be!
Hee!
November 7th, 2005 at 7:44 am#35
Still Stuck On Words?
Follow Me BK.
Weight In Silence!
Silence in Weight!
Remove Your Bias!!
I weight You!
You I weight!
Time to Study
While they Fight
Amongst Them SElves
As they Split us
WE Split THEM.
SON of MAN
Look And LEarn
Be NICE!
NICE BE!
Follow
LooK and Learn –AJ
AETZI
Yetzirah. On that basis, a relationship can be established between these four forms of calculation, the four spiritual realms, and the four letters of God’s name:
November 7th, 2005 at 8:15 amLetter Calculation Form World
yud Absolute value Atzilut
hei Ordinal value Beriah
vav Reduced value Yetzirah
hei Integral reduced value Asiyah
Coburn also went on to say his training as a physician allows him to tell through body language if a person is lying or not.He’s supposedly used this skill on committees’during testimonies.What a nut job.
November 7th, 2005 at 8:20 amSharon, #29, thank you for your warning about not taking Charlie and George down to the bar where we can pick up on some of the gals because you note that they are both butt-ugly and stupid. Have no fear for me and those two, however, as the bar I hang out at is full of rightwing, conservative rednecks.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but have you seen the broads that hang out in places like that? Skinny-assed redheads, mostly, and nearly all missing at least a tooth or two. I mean, Sharon, you don’t know what “butt-ugly” really is.
November 7th, 2005 at 8:38 am#40 Joe, You are so funny, realy. Your right I didn’t know butt ugly, given your discription. Hope Ya all have a great time with the toothless red heads….Blessings
November 7th, 2005 at 9:21 amDuh-oh!!!!
On the minus side, I read in this AM’s paper that Sen J. Biden wants an up or down vote. No filibuster. Dickhead Joe, ready to thwart progressives one more time.
November 7th, 2005 at 10:09 amScholar Ship?
Like the One Bush Has?
And Rove Never Got?
Or Cheneys Degree?
Education?
So only ‘College’ or ‘Colluding’ People can Make Rational Decisions? Or Perhaps Delude us Thru Words?
I guess Money also Makes you Smart?
Money makes Better Genes and DNA also eh?
For I work With My Hands
The Leaders drown My Voice?
Me to College?
No.
But hey!
Thanks for Making My Job So Much Easier.
Your Lack Of Self Education makes YOU easy Targets Rushco.
So College Trains NEo-Cons, ‘Liberals’, Conservatives, and Democrats?
See BK I went to None Of the Above.
And BK Went Where?
Hypocrisy again?
Give up the Ghost BK
WE SEE THRU You.
See, I went to the
School Of Hard Knocks BK
Where we USE oUr ‘Brains’ and Our ‘Brawn’
Shall Ever you Stop your Money
iNspired Thoughts
Of Intelligence?
Tsk! TSk!
Now I use the Words of the Books we, ‘The People’, Have
available to us.
The Gemiatra….
The Bible……
The Quran….
The Torah….
The Talmud….
Sanskrit…..
Greek……
Quballah….
Political Philosopy….
Einstein, Maxwell, Bearden, Lorentz, Tesla,…
And IM Wearing a Tin Foil Hat? Really?
This is What caused your GOP+NEO-Kook Problem.
When those try to Deceive
Create those with Dire Need.
In Other Words, Your Lies, Brought Truth.
“Intelligent-Design” in BloVian Speak.
Care to Try to ‘TIN HAT’ me again? =)
I pick mY Fights Rush
NOW I Pick YOU.
In the Words of your Amoral Monkey Boy;
“Bring it on!”
Rover is Done
November 7th, 2005 at 10:27 amNext IS YOU.
OK, I’d been to townhall.com before, and I seemed to remember it being a crock of shit rightwingnut site. So, I just thought I’d look again, cause the above blowhard.
I was right. It’s still a crock of shit rightwingnut site who’se respondents 75% love Alioto. Need I say more?
bk – you’re a twit. Go back to righty web sites and PLEASE STAY THERE. Cordially yours from the progressives at ThinkProgress…..
November 7th, 2005 at 10:33 amI-Right-I,
Are you a masochist? Do you enjoy coming here and getting your ass handed to you every time you post some of your rubbish?
Judd is not saying he disagrees with Alito’s ruling- he’s saying he agrees with the idiot Coburn that Alito has legislated from the bench and is an “activist judge.”
November 7th, 2005 at 11:29 amthey only think it’s activist if the judge votes against their wishes. Their idea of “activist” is kinda fluid.
November 7th, 2005 at 11:41 amWhy is it when Republicans want a law passed….and a Judge ruules in thier favor – he is doing his job? But when a Judge rules against what the Repubs or Crazy Religious Reich wants – they are “Activist”???? Also – why…why, why does any American citizen NEED or WANT a Machine Gun? Same goes for a AK47 — if we have to hand guns to the public – why not just hand guns? Who needs Hollow point bullets???
November 7th, 2005 at 12:05 pmI-Right-I,
Are you a masochist? Do you enjoy coming here and getting your ass handed to you every time you post some of your rubbish?
Judd is not saying he disagrees with Alito’s ruling- he’s saying he agrees with the idiot Coburn that Alito has legislated from the bench and is an “activist judge.â€
Comment by Redleg
I can read and know perfectly well what Judd said and meant, thus my comment. If you could read you wouldn’t have bothered to tell me what he said. Here’s your ass.
November 7th, 2005 at 12:18 pmYesterday, I was channel surfing and paused on Meet the Press just in time to hear Coburn make this particular remark. I thought “What a freakin’ moron. He doesn’t even know which side he’s on.” Then I changed the channel.
He must have been daydreaming about sterilizing teenaged lesbians back in Oklahoma and got flustered.
November 7th, 2005 at 12:36 pm“I can read and know perfectly well what Judd said and meant, thus my comment.”
Sadly, no. Your comment asked why we are complaining about Alito legislating from the bench, but nobody was complaining about that. The complaint is that the Rethugs claim that “activist” judges are hurting our country but they they go ahead and nominate a uber-activist.
So go ahead and have your ass. Here, I am handing it to you….
November 7th, 2005 at 2:22 pmI’m not surprised at Judd’s and Tom Coburn’s underwhelming lack of mastery of constitutional jargon. Coburn is an MD by training, not a lawyer, and Judd is – er, well, Judd.
Commerce clause cases are about the limits of Congress’ power to legislate – not the particular policy preferences of the judges who decide particular cases. Congressmen and senators are notoriously jealous in guarding their legislative prerogatives, but at the end of the day it is the Supreme Court that decides the limits of those prerogatives under the Constitution.
To decide that Congress may not legislate on a particular subject is not to legislate from the bench. It is merely to say that, according to the framework of federalism established by the Constitution, legislation on that subject is the prerogative of the states, rather than Congress. This is judging, according to the Constitution, not “legislating from the bench” – no matter what Judd and Senator Coburn may say.
November 7th, 2005 at 2:38 pmIt’s wonderful when you corner a Republican, because then they start telling the truth.
Yeah. Under threat of perjury.
November 7th, 2005 at 4:22 pmHe must have been daydreaming about sterilizing teenaged lesbians back in Oklahoma and got flustered.
Comment by Roger Spark
I don’t see the problem. The ONLY way I’d have a teenage lesbian is if she were sterilized. I don’t think plain old soap and water works on those girls.
November 7th, 2005 at 4:59 pmMizzIWrongY demostrates the Nazi tactic of sterilization. Nazis are always the same, sterilize this, kill that. Republican Nazis are an abomination and a threat to world stability. They all need mandatory medication and hospitilization to prevent them from harming themselves or the greater society…
November 7th, 2005 at 7:03 pmI-Right-I,
You must be delusional. You better put your thinking cap on if you think you are going to talk your shit. You can start by actually reading what people write instead of just making shit up.
By the way, John in Chicago smoked your ass while I was absent from this forum.
November 7th, 2005 at 10:03 pmBy the way, John in Chicago smoked your ass while I was absent from this forum.
Comment by Redleg
Really? I thought that was something else he was puffing on.
November 8th, 2005 at 9:49 amI-Right-I
November 8th, 2005 at 5:22 pmIt’s a free country, right? LOL
I-Right-I
It’s a free country, right? LOL
Comment by Redleg
Really? Try being free and see what happens.
November 8th, 2005 at 8:55 pm“One conclusion our data suggests is that those justices often considered more “liberal†– Justices Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens – vote least frequently to overturn Congressional statutes, while those often labeled “conservative†vote more frequently to do so. At least by this measure (others are possible, of course), the latter group is the most activist.”
WOW. Liberals believe in untrammeled Federal power. Surprise surprise.
Luv that Kelo ruling, eh?
Ah. The handy dandy Commerce Clause. It sure does come in handy! The recent Supreme Court decision regarding Medical Marajuana was also based on the Commerce Clause. Which still puzzles me, because the case was about the right to USE it, not the right to sell it. But the majority of those who depend upon it are terminal anyway, and the Supreme Court is FOREVER!!! And until the Right figures out how to profit from it and control it’s distribution, without their “base†freaking out…. And so we wait…”
Quit talking common sense, or someone will accuse you of being another Clarence Thomas!
November 13th, 2005 at 4:41 pm(hint: the dissenters on that ruling were on the more conservative side, another ’surprise, surprise’)
“Strict constructionists are not textualists. They look to history and precedent as their guides for providing what the text itself does not. In most cases, that points to an archaic era in which civil liberties, technology, and economic systems were far from what we expect today.”
This distorts things immeasurably. Original intent is simply a bulwark against the sin of a judge inserting their own philosophies into law. If you dont respect the law as it is written and attempt to understand the context of where the law came from, then you are not being a judge at all. Even the idea that looking at original intent in interpretation is given the label ‘originalism’ is close to absurd, as EVERY judge ought to be looking to the intent of the words in the laws as a part of their legal interpretation (how much weight you give it may be a matter for debate, but it must be a part of the fabric of judicial interpretation).
“Scalia says that his purpose is to “preserve society’s values.†”
Actually, what he REALLY says is in “A Matter of Interpretation” and that statement misrepresents his views. He wants to first and foremost defend the law as it it (as he sees it), and he doesnt think it is the judicial branches job to go about doing the job of the other branches of Government.
“Why should the common practices of the past have more authority than the common practice of today? Neither, in fact, is necessarily more correct than the other.”
Er, its not the practices of yesterday but the WRITTEN LAW that should have more precedence than the whims of a Judge today. As nominee Roberts said, Judges should be umpires, not ballplayers.
Now we find liberals trying to redefine the terms of the debate as a way to wriggle out of the consequences of a public disliking Judges that keep making nutty rulings that offend the vast majority of voters.
The liberals like it when Judge trample on democracy to make some new ‘right’, eg, like creating gay marriages in Massachusetts. Problem is, it is not based on the text, the law, nothing except the political philosophies of the judges. In the MA case, it was explicitly *denied* by those crafted the ERA provision in the Mass. constitution that it would allow for gay marriages; that same privision was (mis)read by the court to create a ‘right’ for gays to marry.
In truth, no law or constitution previously written granted the right; the court constructed a ‘right’ out of whole cloth and declared. That is the essense of judicial legislating, going beyond reasonable interpretation of law to the realm of created public policy. Matters like that should be decided democratically, by the political branches.
November 13th, 2005 at 4:55 pm“Has it occurred to any of the conservatives who pan over sites such as this one just how vacuous most (all?) liberals are? If you want genuine scholarship and insight, go to Townhall.com; at least there you’ll get some ideas thrown your way instead of the characteristic pablum spewing from the talentless eunuchs who (surprise, surprise) mindlessly reiterate whatever their equally mindless white, female instructors serve up at some east-coast quasi-university.”
Yes, it is a thought.
It is depressing to think that one throwaway word spoken between two non-lawyers amounts to a ‘gotcha’ moment for the liberals.
It’s almost funny when you have folks like Schumer both (a) demanding that Roe v Wade (exhibit ‘a’ in judicial legislation) be respected, and (b) *also* deriding ‘judicial legislation’.
It’s as if the term has a bad odor so we must all be against it rhetorically, even if it ties us up into a pretzel of illogic.
I would like liberals to define judicial legislation, then defend or deride it.
November 13th, 2005 at 5:01 pmlesbian hentai
You are invited to check some relevant information on big butt girls lesbian strap on
November 20th, 2005 at 1:55 pm[...] Even Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) has acknowledged that Alito “was legislating” from the bench in Rybar. [...]
January 10th, 2006 at 3:59 pm[...] • Despite conservative senators’ claims, Alito has a history of legislating from the bench. Senators Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Charles Grassley (R-IA) both praised Alito for showing judicial restraint throughout his career, but his record proves otherwise. While on the bench, Alito has stepped over judicial boundaries and overturned existing laws. He has been described as “an activist conservative judge” and even Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) admitted that Alito “was legislating” in the case of U.S. v. Rybar. [...]
January 11th, 2006 at 8:42 amLesbian Sex Free Lesbian Porn Blonde Lesbians
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 14th, 2008 at 2:28 pmPreteen Preteen Pussy Model Pre Teen Underwear
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 4:53 amLesbian Sex Lesbian Anime Teenage Lesbian
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 9:51 pmAss Thick Ass Babes Kick Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 1:59 amHentai Videl Hentai Tenchi Hentai
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 3:13 amHentai Raven Hentai Hentai Clips
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 5:54 amSandra Oh Gallery
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page?and have to say thanks. nice read?
March 17th, 2008 at 9:45 pmLesbians Lesbian 69 Indian Lesbians
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 12:28 pmHentai Hentai Misty Pokemon Naruto Hentai
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 2:41 amLesbian Sex Free Lesbian Sex Videos Lesbian Sex Videos
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 4:24 amLesbians Girls Lesbians Teen Lesbians
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 8:46 amLesbians Lesbian Girls Lesbian Twins
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 4:24 pmYoung Girls Youngest Boys Gallery Young Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 6:22 amPreteen Preteen Lolitas Innocent Preteens
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 8:15 pmTeen Girls Teen Chat Teen Panties
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 10:55 am[...] to join the Sparks, who he appeared with in the 1967 Warner …http://paprecords.podomatic.com/Think Progress &187 Blog Archive &187 Sen. Coburn R-OK Admits Alito …P.S. Billy O&8217Reilly called me and tried to teach me how to use a vibrator. … aside those [...]
April 13th, 2008 at 9:16 pm