[Gordongekko909]

And in his current position as a 9th Circuit judge, he has openly discussed his view that “social justice” and “individual rights” should serve as a “guiding principle of the judicial branch.”

"Social Justice" is a joke. I attend Loyola University New Orleans, which has, for some reason, decided to start referring to itself as "Social Justice University." As economics professor Walter Block pointed out in the Maroon, people have a rather hard time defining "social justice," especially when asked to distinguish it from plain-vanilla "justice."

As for those who dare to define it, however, it invariably ends up looking like left-wing socialism, multiculturalism, and secularism.

While that is a political stance, of sorts, it is not a judicial philosophy. This Reinhardt fellow embodies all that is wrong with an activist judiciary. He sees his position as lord over the ignorant masses who are too stupid to elect legislators who conform to his vision of how the world should work, and believes that he must slap these peons down as a matter of right.

The more his power gets diluted, the better off we will be.

[BenLurkin]

"Social justice" requires the suspension of genuine justice.

(That is, "justice" as understood in the Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, Anglo-American tradition which is the foundation of our society.)

[Sonny M]

As economics professor Walter Block pointed out in the Maroon, people have a rather hard time defining "social justice," especially when asked to distinguish it from plain-vanilla "justice."

Ihad to take 2 different types of social justice classes.

One teacher was a flaming leftist (except on abortion) with die hard marxist beliefs, while the 2nd social justice class, had a solid right wing conservative.

The classes were as different as literature and mathematics.

And your right, it isn't a judicial philosophy. Liberal social justice is marxism, unabashed, and unrefined.