Skip to comments.
The Limits of 'Growth' - Justice O'Connor becomes a full-fledged judicial activist ~ John Fund
Opinion Journal ^
| December 11, 2003
| John Fund
Posted on 12/11/2003 3:59:57 AM PST by Elle Bee
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:06:13 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Justice O'Connor becomes a full-fledged judicial activist.
Thursday, December 11, 2003 12:01 a.m.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor more or less completed her ideological journey toward judicial activism yesterday when she cast the deciding vote upholding the McCain-Feingold restrictions on campaign speech. Proponents of judicial restraint who were leery of her when Ronald Reagn appointed her in 1981 acknowledge that even they didn't expect her to come under the sway of elite opinion as much as she has.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; cfr; johnfund; judicialactivisim; oconnor; scotus; supremes
Click Logo to go to:
.
1
posted on
12/11/2003 3:59:57 AM PST
by
Elle Bee
To: Elle Bee
I think ole O'Conner has an FBI file out there
To: cars for sale
IMPEACH, IMPEACH and IMPEACH any Traitor to their oath to uphold the Constitution of the USA!
3
posted on
12/11/2003 4:27:02 AM PST
by
iopscusa
(El Vaquero)
To: iopscusa
IMPEACH, IMPEACH and IMPEACH any Traitor to their oath to uphold the Constitution of the USA! That would include five Justices, Pres. Bush, and a majority of Senators and Congressmen. Impeachment is justified, but it's not going to happen as long as the majority in Congress doesn't give a damn about the Constitution and the rule of law. Congress's silence for decades of judicial activism has granted judges the license to ignore the Constitution and has persuaded a majority of the remaining oligarchs to ignore it as well.
To: Elle Bee
The door was opened for all this when liberals and conservatives alike started several years ago the claim that the 1st Amendment did not apply to commercial speech and the courts went along with banning cigarette and liquor ads.
When "reasonable people" went along with this semantic game the chase was on and it was only a matter of time before "reasonable people" began to think that political speech could also be curtailed.
By the way, "reasonable people" also think that "common sense" restrictions on the 2nd Amendment are just fine.
5
posted on
12/11/2003 4:32:53 AM PST
by
metesky
(Kids, don't let this happen to you!)
To: Elle Bee
I may vote Republican, but I am certainly not gonna send money to these traitors.
To: Elle Bee
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor more or less completed her ideological journey toward judicial activism yesterday when she cast the deciding vote upholding the McCain-Feingold restrictions on campaign speech.Seems to me that O'Connor has joined Jumpin Jim Jeffords and defected to the liberal left. She needs to resign. The only problem is, the RATs will never let a TRUE conservative justice get on the Supreme Court.
7
posted on
12/11/2003 4:56:05 AM PST
by
Arrowhead1952
(Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter are living proof that not all blonds are dumb.)
To: Elle Bee
This is the worst decision in my lifetime. Yes I know W was part of this but; turning away from him will only hurt us more. Let's pray that conservatives don't stay home next year over this.
8
posted on
12/11/2003 5:00:56 AM PST
by
jmaroneps37
( Please support how-odd? dean in the primaries. That just might get us 4 more senate seats!)
To: Elle Bee
How absurd that O'Connor is described as a resident of Arizona. O'Connor lives in Europe, specifically France, during times when the USSC is out of session which happens to be about half the year. She jets in at the last possible second before her sessions begin.
May she rot in an eternal place which she has created for herself. She's a globalist child killing skank.
9
posted on
12/11/2003 5:02:27 AM PST
by
blackdog
(Proudly raising Wisconsin racing sheep since 1998......Sheep Darby tripple crown winners fer sure)
To: Elle Bee
Proponents of judicial restraint who were leery of her when Ronald Reagn appointed her in 1981 acknowledge that even they didn't expect her to come under the sway of elite opinion as much as she has.
Even Reagan gave in to the PC crowd and had a woman's seat set for the court
10
posted on
12/11/2003 5:13:11 AM PST
by
uncbob
To: jmaroneps37
You call this the worst decision in your lifetime and then seek to absolve Bush from blame? Both Bush and O'Conner are Rockefeller Republicans, by birth and by instinct. Bush, however, campaigned against a campaign finance bill and then ducked for cover when the going got tough. He shold have vetoed the bill, but making a move even "Slick Willy" would approve, passed the buck to an activist Supreme Court.
In sum, Bush's domestic politics have been an utter disaster for both the Republican party and the nation.
11
posted on
12/11/2003 5:43:35 AM PST
by
gaspar
To: PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
Exactly! This "law" greatly favors incumbents and we would be asking those most likely to benefit to impeach their benefactors.
To: Elle Bee
Another sad day for us in Arizona. She is a disgrace!
13
posted on
12/11/2003 6:58:44 AM PST
by
Don Corleone
(Leave the gun..take the cannolis)
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson