Posted on 06/24/2022 5:08:49 AM PDT by Perseverando
"A conservative among liberals, and a liberal among conservatives," he was not consistently conservative enough for Republican President Warren G. Harding and he was not consistently liberal enough for Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt. As a result, he was passed over several times to be a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.
His name was Learned Hand, who served as a judge for over 50 years, first on New York's District Court, then on the U.S. Court of Appeals. Judge Hand's legal decisions were so respected they were referenced in U.S. Supreme Court Cases.
Though a political progressive, he was an advocate of judicial restraint, stating: "(he could not) frame any definition that will explain when the Court will assume the role of a third legislative chamber and when it will limit its authority."
In 1934, Judge Hand ruled in United States v. Schechter Poultry that Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" federal law did not apply to a poultry firm which operated only within the State of New York.
In 1937, Judge Learned Hand condemned Franklin Roosevelt's attempt to pack the Supreme Court with as many as 15 justices in order to get the Court's approval of his power usurping big government programs.
In this, Judge Hand was in agreement with James Madison. Madison explained to Congress in 1794, that just because something needed to be done, it was not the Federal Government's job to do it: "The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanminute.com ...
is that who the expression out of hand refers to...
hmm.
America used to be made up of a lot of people who did what was right and not what was politically expedient.
I never knew this.
So the Deep State has been at this for a long time now.
Among “serious legal scholars” (meaning leftists weirdo fruitcakes), Judge Hand has the same main problem as Justice Thomas; he wrote opinions that made sense. Yes, he was a “progressive” like nearly everyone else was at the time, but he was constrained by (evidently) morality from trying to impose a political agenda via the courts.
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.