[Austin Willard Wright]

Agreed but please note all the "true conservatives" including Rush who wanted to overturn the will of the voters in California on medical marijuana.

[Thrusher]

I disagree ... a simple majority ballot initiative is not an end run around the Constitution. Supporting such a move is what I'd call activism. Support the petition pertained to an enumerated right, such as the second amendment ... if a majority of lily-livered liberals in a small blue enclave passed an initiative petition to confiscate all firearms, the 2nd amendment be damned, would it be judicial activism to say, "sorry, you can't do that in that manner?" No, it would be upholding the constitution in classic strict-constructionist tradition.

This is an excellent point worth serious consideration. The framers of the Constitution did not want a pure "majority rules" democracy, which one one could argue is just another version of monarchy, at least in terms of its affects on the minority individual. Perhaps a strict constructionist -- knowing more about the facts of the particular case than most of us on this forum -- would have a different opinion on the situation at hand.

Just a thought.

[dmz]

LOL.

Judicial activism is what it's called when it goes against you.

It's hailed as the correct approach when it goes for you.