Yeah Right.
Posted on 02/03/2015 7:21:53 AM PST by PROCON
Associate Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor flatly rejected on Monday the view that any U.S. Supreme Court justices practice judicial activism.
Speaking Monday to a standing-room only event at the Palm Beach County Convention Center in West Palm Beach, Fla., the 60-year-old justice was asked to give her reaction to those who complain about judicial activism on the one hand, yet want the Court to declare laws unconstitutional on the other.
"I think most judges have a definition of judicial activism," Sotomayor said. "It’s a ruling you don’t like."
Sotomayor’s assertion that no judicial activism exists — an article of faith among most conservatives — puts her squarely at odds with Justice Antonin Scalia, who has been critical of the trend toward interpreting the law in whatever way appears to attain socially desirable objectives.
The justice’s statements came at a sold-out gathering of The Forum Club of the Palm Beaches and the Palm Beach County Bar Association.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
"Every judge is trying to do the best that he or she can to enforce the law as he or she believes it is written."
It’s easy for fish to forget that water exists...
This is really the same kind of thinking as: “Black people cannot be racist.”
This is the woman who's bragged about her getting into college and law school by affirmative action being a good thing.
The greatest accomplishment of the devil was to convince the world he didn’t exist...
It’s her job to interpret the law with the case before her. NOT enforce the law on how she “feels” it should be. A wise latrina she is!
Most American Citizens have a definition of jackazz too...
.
Sonia Sotomayor would not recognize judicial activism if it gave her a fetch upside the head.
She has lived immersed in the culture of activism for so long, she thinks it is something EVERYBODY does.
For her, no objective standards exist, everything is “situational”, and entirely relative to whatever else is going on at the moment.
That’s a lie
She is liberal, and she will soon vote to impose homosexual marriage on the entire country. She will be overturning marriage laws in all 50 states. That is a key example of judicial activism. She is itching along with the other liberals, to impose homosexual marriage through judicial fiat.
Wish liberals would be honest about what they are doing.
You'll hear the phrase 'judicial activism' from Sotomayor types every hour on the hour.
So she’s a denier?
Exactly. Liberal judges cannot be judicial activists the same way that blacks cannot be racists.
Shut up and make me a qasadilla you silly bish
She’s just so wise . . . how lucky we are to have her passing laws.
Perfect.
Would IQ tests for Supreme Court justices be a bad thing?
It would be deemed “racist and sexist” because of its “disparate impact”.
That could only happen when conservatives get the sack to fight back instead of trying to be civil with these people who seek our extermination.
Or rewritten, in the case of Traitor Roberts.
Yeah Right.
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.