About . . . . Classes . . . . Books . . . . Vita . . . . Blog. . . . Podcast

by Peter Moskos

June 30, 2010

Checks and Balances

Wouldn't it be nice if the Senate said, "Liberal or conservative, we're not going to approve any Supreme Court justice that won't tell us his or her position on issues"?

The Senate is not supposed to be a rubber stamp.

The founding fathers had no stated opinions on many current issues. Semi-automatic handguns didn't exist when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. Police didn't exists. And on another subject I don't think it's a stretch to say the Founding Fathers did not write the Bill of Rights with for-profit corporations in mind.

So can we move beyond the incorrect liberal/conservative activist/originalist lie? The Supreme Court is politics. Always has been. Always will be. Maybe it should be. But when the court passes "conservative" decisions related to corporate rights and gun control--when the court overturns local law and extends the reach of the constitution--that is by definition an activist court.

The Constitution is and should be a living document. Of course justices have to interpret the Constitution. That is their job. I just want my side to win.

No comments: