< .comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Massachusetts Liberal

Observations on politics, the media and life in Massachusetts and beyond from the left side of the road.

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

This is what judicial activism looks like

One of the bedrock rants of the conservative movements is aimed at liberal judges who "make law" from the bench, overriding the "will of the people."

My friends, meet Judge Roger Vinson, a conservative judge who overrode the will of 535 people duly and properly elected in on of the most breathtaking judicial overreaches we have seen as a nation.

He even took it one step further than a conservative judicial colleague in Virginia, striking down the entire law over one provision. I believe that is called legislating from the bench.
“The act, like a defectively designed watch, needs to be redesigned and reconstructed by the watchmaker,” Judge Vinson wrote.
To ask a favorite conservative question: Who elected him?

It is important to remember that Vinson, appointed by Ronald Reagan, just evened the score at 2-2 in terms of judicial rulings on the law's constitutionality. His ruling and that of a George W. Bush counterbalance those of two Bill Clinton appointees.

So now its inevitably on to the Supreme Court, where the law's fate will be decided by yet another Reagan appointee. But first we can rest assured that conservatives will attempt to unlevel the playing field by calling for the recusal of Justice Elena Kagan because she served for a time as the Obama Administration's solicitor general.

Hardly the same level of conflict as having dinner with one of the key players in a case.

Nor is it comforting that a Supreme Court with many of the same justices authored the single large judicial overreach in the nation's history -- ignoring the national popular vote and overriding Florida's laws (so much for state's rights) to install a president.

And let's not forget that conservative president appointed members such as Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito who have taken judicial activism to a new level on the high court.

Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rogers = Roberts unless of course you're calling him a pirate.

February 01, 2011 5:12 AM  
Anonymous Joel Patterson said...

OL, don't forget Judge Hudson had business ties to the Virginia AG whose case he sided with.

February 01, 2011 6:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Surely you wouldn't advocate the Supreme Court dismiss the important role of the electoral college in deciding the President? Looking to dissolve the Republic and force a national democracy?

February 01, 2011 9:04 AM  
Blogger Outraged Liberal said...

Ooops on Roberts. Thanks.

February 01, 2011 9:05 AM  
Blogger Readwriteblue said...

That was a nice attempt at a riposte but it is short of the mark. Wasn't there just a vote to repeal the act in the House? Weren't there more votes for repeal than votes in favor of the this flawed and controversial legislation when it was enacted? Since you demand that the peoples' will be heard, do you now support a vote in the Senate?

February 01, 2011 10:47 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home