Posted on 02/27/2010 10:03:26 AM PST by Steelfish
Goodwin Liu on Constitutional Welfare Rights—Part 2 [Ed Whelan]
As shown by my Part 1 excerpts from Ninth Circuit nominee Goodwin Liu’s law-review article on “Rethinking Constitutional Welfare Rights,” Liu argues for what he calls an “interstitial” judicial role in recognizing constitutional “welfare rights” (broadly defined to include claimed affirmative rights to “education, shelter, subsistence, health care and the like, or to the money these things cost”).
Liu calls for judges to engage in “socially situated modes of reasoning that appeal … to the culturally and historically contingent meanings of particular social goods in our own society” and to “determine, at the moment of decision, whether our collective values on a given issue have converged to a degree that they can be persuasively crystallized and credibly absorbed into legal doctrine.”
I promised a critique of Liu’s argument, but I confess that I’m tempted merely to say to anyone who has read the excerpts I’ve presented (or the broader article): To those who have a sober understanding of the judicial role under the American Constitution, no further explanation is necessary. To those who think Liu’s conception seems sober, no further explanation is possible.
But let me try anyway. Let’s consider some basic defects in Liu’s two-pronged response to the objection that the judicial role that he advocates invites judges, in the guise of interpreting the Constitution, to impose their own values on society:
1. The judicial role that Liu proposes—“determin[ing] … whether our collective values on a given issue have converged to a degree that they can be persuasively crystallized and credibly absorbed into legal doctrine”—“requires keen attention to the trajectory of social norms reflected in public policies, institutions, and practices, as well as predictive judgment as to how a judicial decision may help forge or frustrate a social consensus.”
(Excerpt) Read more at bench.nationalreview.com ...
He’ll maintain the 9th Circuit’s sterling record as the most reversed circuit court of appeal in American history.
What Obama cannot get in Congress, he now proposes creating law by judiciary.
road. paved. good intentions. hell. handcart.
depressing
Once again, BO appoints someone who has nothing but distain for our Constitution and our country. A cultural stranger. This guy has only been practicing law for 12 years. Has to be one of those extremely rare EEOC Asian hires. I want my country back from these people.
Judges and politicians using the U.S. Constitution to wipe their putrid, leftist backsides.
That’s not becoming of anyone who’s studied The Constitution and since he’s had to take an oath regarding The Constiution, then he clearly doesn’t understand it and should be disbarred.
Does this need to be approved by the Senate?
“socially situated modes of reasoning that appeal … to the culturally and historically contingent meanings of particular social goods in our own society” and to “determine, at the moment of decision, whether our collective values on a given issue have converged to a degree that they can be persuasively crystallized and credibly absorbed into legal doctrine.”
http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/saywhat.wav
http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/crap.wav
http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/justice.wav
http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/horse.wav
The 9th Circuit remains the most corrupt part of the judicial system; always looking for ways to destroy Constitutional rule. Having watched them for a while, I can no longer discuss their actions in terms of “judicial philosophy.” They aren’t about philosophy - which would imply thoughtful argument concerning issues upon which reasonable people could disagree - or at least, where more than one valid perspective is possible. I mean what I said in the first sentence. These are dangerous people - which is exactly what they intend to be.
Welfare rights??
lol.
They need to launch the Welfare Union Party... oh right, we already have the Democrats.
“Once again, BO appoints someone who has nothing but distain for our Constitution and our country. A cultural stranger. This guy has only been practicing law for 12 years. Has to be one of those extremely rare EEOC Asian hires. I want my country back from these people.”
True, but in doing so he’s appointing someone sewn from the same cloth he is. I’m sure Obama knows all about him - he’s exactly who he wants.
Check this out...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck&NR=1
Never attribute to conspiracy that which can be explained by stupidity. Bright they aren’t. And I practice law in California in an area subject to the California Fifth District Court of Appeals, which many of us here refer to as the 9th Circuit’s “farm club”.
Yes
The courts have a traditional role in protecting the individual from the tyranny of the populist majority and for securing the rights of the individual to life, liberty and property. To believe that the judiciary should interpret law to impose some sense of the convergence of today’s popular opinion is just downright scary.
As a local legislator, I am constrained in creating regulation on the use of private property to the protection of the general public health, safety and morals from substantial harm/injury. Just because some NIMBY group in town feels that they should collectively control the ultimate use of all property in the watershed does not expand my legislative powers to be able to do that. According to this guy’s interpretation, he would embrace that “convergence” of popular opinion and force the owner to use his property according to the whim of collective.
It is the same with welfare (forced charity) and my right to use my property/pocket book for my own benefit and purposes. If the fruits of my labor are an extension of the ownership of my own body (which is a god-given natural right,) then this fellow would impress me into slavery for the benefit of another.
Well stated!
Sponging off the productive by the non-productive is NOT a right. It’s a bloody travesty!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.