Liberal vs Conservative judges

[kcshocker11]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1995232,00.html

"Judicial activism" is the number-one conservative talking point about the law these days. Liberal judges, the argument goes, make law, while conservative judges simply apply the law as it is written.
It's a phony claim. Conservative jurists are every bit as activist as liberal ones. But the critique is also wrong as an approach to the law. In fact, judges always have to interpret vague clauses and apply them to current facts — it's what judging is all about.

Quite an interesting article, see what you think!

8)

[Maggie]

Well I have actually read the Harvard commencement speech given by Justice Souter (and also a wrongheaded editorial about it in the Washington Post), which this fellow apparently holds in high regard and relies heavily upon, have you? I suggest you do so before commenting on this essay.

The problem is the target of Souter’s criticism, and by extension this author’s, appears to be an approach to judging that no one, absolutely no one, actually holds and defends. The speech employs straw men almost worthy of President Obama, the current title-holder in the straw-man argument championships. Souter describes an argument no one makes in order to advance an argument that is itself amazingly weak. You see what he finds wanting is a wholly mechanical approach to jurisprudence that would find every case “straightforward” and easy, as long as the judges were committed to a “fair reading” of the Constitution. It is odd and silly speech.

[kcshocker11]

Well I have actually read the Harvard commencement speech given by Justice Souter (and also a wrongheaded editorial about it in the Washington Post), which this fellow apparently holds in high regard and relies heavily upon, have you? I suggest you do so before commenting on this essay.

The problem is the target of Souter’s criticism, and by extension this author’s, appears to be an approach to judging that no one, absolutely no one, actually holds and defends. The speech employs straw men almost worthy of President Obama, the current title-holder in the straw-man argument championships. Souter describes an argument no one makes in order to advance an argument that is itself amazingly weak. You see what he finds wanting is a wholly mechanical approach to jurisprudence that would find every case “straightforward” and easy, as long as the judges were committed to a “fair reading” of the Constitution. It is odd and silly speech.

I believe you should redirect your first comments to the person who wrote the article or Judge Souter! I dont claim to speak for him but perhaps he would think your comments are odd and silly! 8)

[Maggie]

Well I have actually read the Harvard commencement speech given by Justice Souter (and also a wrongheaded editorial about it in the Washington Post), which this fellow apparently holds in high regard and relies heavily upon, have you? I suggest you do so before commenting on this essay.

The problem is the target of Souter’s criticism, and by extension this author’s, appears to be an approach to judging that no one, absolutely no one, actually holds and defends. The speech employs straw men almost worthy of President Obama, the current title-holder in the straw-man argument championships. Souter describes an argument no one makes in order to advance an argument that is itself amazingly weak. You see what he finds wanting is a wholly mechanical approach to jurisprudence that would find every case “straightforward” and easy, as long as the judges were committed to a “fair reading” of the Constitution. It is odd and silly speech.

I believe you should redirect your first comments to the person who wrote the article or Judge Souter! I dont claim to speak for him but perhaps he would think your comments are odd and silly! 8)

A flippant kc; how novel.

Well, I can write with confidence that Justice Souter did read his speech at least on one occasion as for the author I assume he read the speech as well (although these days you can never be so sure – a lot of people seen to want to opine on things they have not read).

You asked for comments and I responded. It that not what you wanted?

BTW – for future reference it is Justice Souter not Judge Souter. ;-)