"Randy Barnett argues that since the nation's founding, but especially since the 1930s, the courts have been cutting holes in the original Constitution and its amendments to eliminate the parts that protect liberty from the power of government."
Sometimes I get the impression from reading FR that some of us conservatives think the Courts have been giving us too much liberty that we shouldn't have, while overly restricting the power of the governments.
You mention the Commerce Clause; it was Justice Scalia's recent use of it in a medical marijuana case that made it plain to me that he is, when it suits him, the activist judge that it has been claimed he is elsewhere on the thread.
Scalia upheld the state and federal laws.
There seem to be plenty of parallels between Left and Right, I guess. But the idea that government should play a central role in shaping and ordering society, while fundamentally leftist in my view, clearly also finds a home with many on the Right. Our president is a good example of a man who thinks this IMO, --
Yep. There are very few politicians that view our Constitution as uninfringeable.
much as I like and admire him otherwise.
He's ok, I guess, from the standpoint of his possible replacements.
Thanks for #174 and the book recommendation. Looks interesting. Who is Barnett, btw.
Prof. Barnett is making a name for himself as a constitutional libertarian. Rational man, well respected in the judicial system.
"Randy Barnett argues that since the nation's founding, but especially since the 1930s, the courts have been cutting holes in the original Constitution and its amendments to eliminate the parts that protect liberty from the power of government."
Sometimes I get the impression from reading FR that some of us conservatives think the Courts have been giving us too much liberty that we shouldn't have, while overly restricting the power of the governments.
"Too much liberty".. Now there's a concept. Apparently too much liberty is bad for the soul.. - Or something. --
You mention the Commerce Clause; it was Justice Scalia's recent use of it in a medical marijuana case that made it plain to me that he is, when it suits him, the activist judge that it has been claimed he is elsewhere on the thread.
I shudder to think how Salia will 'rule' if the 'reasonable' regulation of firearms ever comes before him, considering his position on 'reasonable' search & seizures.