[1rudeboy]

There’s nothing wrong with the idea of a court being reluctant to legislate from the bench.

[fwdude]

There’s nothing wrong with the idea of a court being reluctant to legislate from the bench.

So, are you saying that Roberts was right about Obamacare?

[ClearCase_guy]

"Hey! That's a bad law! That's unconstitutional! Congress can't do that!"

You think the court is "legislating from the bench" when it says such a thing? The court is stepping outside it's proper bounds when it does this?

[oh8eleven]

There’s nothing wrong with the idea of a court being reluctant to legislate from the bench.
Exactly. Same goes for those who decry congressional "gridlock."
The fewer the laws these clowns pass, the better we'll be.

[fwdude]

There’s nothing wrong with the idea of a court being reluctant to legislate from the bench.

My point is that they ARE legislating from the bench - with half-measures. They go just enough into legislating for one side to try to "even out" the particulars between sides. Thoroughly unconstitutional.