[Texas_Jarhead]

"Justice Stephen G. Breyer says the Supreme Court must promote the political rights of minorities and look beyond the Constitution's text when necessary to ensure that "no one gets too powerful.""

In other words, Justice Breyer has attained, of his own accord, some extra-Consitutional power that allows him to look beyond the Constitution's meaning and intent in order to limit the "power" of other entities. My questions is, where is the check on this self-proclaimed, self-assigned power by the Justice?

[Big Guy and Rusty 99]

I quote article 3, section 3 of the Constitution when I say, "of"

[Jezebelle]

What it boils down to is that Breyer doesn't give a rat's patoot about the constitution. That puts him in league with the left whose goal is to undermine the constitution so that the state becomes the giver (and taker) of rights.

Although the devil is in the details, protecting minority rights is, in and of itself, a worthy effort. But Breyer is saying the court should PROMOTE minority rights, and to do that the court must step around the constitution, he says. He's right about that, but wrong that it should be done. Promoting one group's rights over another's is unconstitutional and extremely detrimental to the country. The correct observation would have been to make this distinction.

[El Gato]

My questions is, where is the check on this self-proclaimed, self-assigned power by the Justice?

Ultimately it lies in the Second Amendment.

But before it comes to that, it lies in the power of impeachment.

Congress might want to think about exercising that power, before the people find they must exercise theirs.

[edsheppa]

My questions is, where is the check on this self-proclaimed, self-assigned power by the Justice?

At this time, it seems the only check is ...