..
....our next supreme court pigeon?
Posted on 04/06/2006 11:41:42 AM PDT by RWR8189
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy lashed out at our humble profession last week, castigating editorial writers whom he said frequently "misinterpret" the Court's reasoning, according to an article in Monday's Washington Post. The Justice didn't single out any newspaper, though we'll admit to having referred to his jurisprudence on more than one occasion as "protean."
We'd humbly reply to Justice Kennedy that it is precisely this trait that has invited such media mau-mauing. While nominated as a conservative by Ronald Reagan, Justice Kennedy has proven on the High Court that he is open for intellectual rent: from his flip-flop on church-state relations in Lee v. Weisman in 1992, to his anti-abortion nods during his confirmation only to turn into a reliable vote for Roe v. Wade, to his recent embrace of foreign law to justify his own legal preferences, and so on.
Thus it is no surprise that the judicial left is already warning Justice Kennedy that he'd better join the Court's liberal big four--or else. On the same day the Post story ran, one prominent liberal newspaper declared that Justice Kennedy is the Court's new "swing" vote and that it is now his moral obligation to replace Sandra Day O'Connor as the fifth vote to deny a new conservative ascendancy.
The writer graciously allowed that Justice Kennedy's "views are evolving" (translation: becoming more liberal), and that there is something "refreshing about a justice who genuinely seems to have an open mind" (translation: someone who doesn't vote with Antonin Scalia). Overall point: Keep it up, sir, and we'll soon be elevating you to the pantheon with Brandeis, Black and Brennan.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
As far as American law goes, Kennedy is the most powerful man there is.
WSJ is doing the right thing on this. We need to pressure him/ostracize him from our side, pre-emptively, framing the whole thing just the way this piece does. Shame him.
The fact that a justice worries whether the media hate him reveals a justice too susceptible to pressure. That is the weakness that produces these pliable judges who flip-flop on plain english and redefine original intent to fit their own passions. The criticism is directed at informing the people of the abuses of government via the judicial branch. It's not aimed at harming or pressuring the judge. He's just feeling exposed because he is guilty of violating his Constitutional limits. If exposure pricks his conscience, then good. It's not about love and hate.
I think we're very lucky that the next two judges on deck are both liberals. If Republicans get their act together for the '06 and '08 elections we can finally take this country back to sanity.
I thought Kennedy was the wrong man when Reagan appointed him. If I remember correctly, he followed the appointment of Mr. Ginsburg, who was denied his seat by the Senate because he was forty, a non-smoker, and ran five miles a day. The Democrats would not have a conservative who might live long. Ginsburg was out over puffing on a maryjane while in college.
So Reagan, to calm the waters appointed this jerk. Now we are going to live with him for a long time. How long before he starts citing foreign stare decisis?
..
....our next supreme court pigeon?
Someone needs to bring him back from the DARK SIDE.
Ditto. Isn't it amazing that one can "evolve" according to secular progressive thought, while traditionalists who interpret the law our Founders established are demonized.
Kennedy was nominated by Reagan after Bork was "borked." If that awful injustice had not been done to Bork, we would have had a much better court. The Dems won when they smeared Bork. That is why they have continued to use that tactic. It worked.
So hopefully this is the first of many articles warning Kennedy not to be a vain glorious sucker. Granted, some would say that pigeon's already flown the coop, but we can still try, and anyway, the landscape has changed. Conservatives have more influence nowadays. Ole Justice Kennedy better recognize!
It depends on which Republican gets elected. Remember Souter, Kennedy and O'Connor were all Republican appointees.
Thus it is no surprise that the judicial left is already warning Justice Kennedy that he'd better join the Court's liberal big four--or else.
Personally, of someone came to me with this, I'd become more conservative than Scalia just for pissing me off.
Keep it up, sir, and we'll soon be elevating you to the pantheon with Brandeis, Black and Brennan.
Elevating to the likes of Hugo Black?! elevating?
Quinn's new law: Liberalism is the art of standing on one's head then telling the rest of the world that they're upside down.
Personally, of someone came to me with this, I'd become more conservative than Scalia just for pissing me off.
I doubt they'd be so plain about it. It's done by innuendo. You know, if you're not in, you're out. Influential people start snubbing you. You hear awful rumors about yourself. It gets lonely out there. Most people can't deal with that sort of freezing-out, though one would hope a Supreme Court Justice would be above it.
I heard an old saying years ago, it's better to be alone than in bad company.
...or was that "it's better to play with your friends than with yourself"...?
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.