Judicial Activism

[richardf8]

Well Dubya has presented his "I Hate Fags" amendment to congress.

Quick question: where was all this hostility to "Judicial Activism" when the Supreme Court overrode the will of the Majority and appointed him president in 2000?

Comments

[kevinjdog.livejournal.com]

And with 2/3 of both houses needed to ratify it, plus a number of states, it hasn't got a chance. It's just more pandering to the right-wing nutcases in his base.

[richardf8]

Thanks for the comforting words. They mean a lot, since you actually have more of a personal investment in this issue than I do.

I expect you're right, but I'm tired of these people ramming the hot rod of patriarchy down the nation's unwilling throat.

[orv.livejournal.com]

I'm not the first one to note this, but it's important to remember that when Bush refers to "activists courts" in this case, he means "courts that follow what the Constitution says."

[lordrunningclam.livejournal.com]

It’s only "Judicial Activism" if you disagree with it.

Typical, really. Republicans are supposedly in favor of "State's Rights" and having the gov stay out of people's lives on the one hand while they force social engineering if the states and local judges don't behave as they think they should. Cf. this, the "Flag Burning Amendment," medical marijuana (or just plain legalization) and abortion. It’s really quite a dance they do trying to keep their fundamentally schizoid constituency happy.

[richardf8]

"State's Rights" is a myth that the Republicans perpetrate in order to shift the burden of paying for services from the Federal Government to the states. The only freedom granted is the freedom to pay.

This is true in matters of Public Education, where funding is reduced even as the Federal Government seeks to mandate a costly and invalid testing program. This is true in matters of Vaterland Security, where federal funds for Police and Fire services are cut even as states and cities are asked to achieve a degree of "Heightened Alert."

"State's Rights" is a euphemism for "Unfunded Mandates," not, as some would have us believe, an affirmation of state sovereignty.

[morgan1.livejournal.com]

No, "states' rights" is a euphemism for "we shouldn't have to drink from the same drinking fountain as those black folks if we don't wanna." It started out as the rallying cry of the anti-civil-rights movement. Whenever you hear someone blathering about "states' rights" just think "we're counting on the majority in a given state to be stupid, hateful, bigoted, and reactionary, and we're all for letting them have their way!"

Of course, you're right that all conservative slogans are just fig leaves for "why it's OK this time to force our agenda on everone else."