Judicial activism by conservatives

The Los Angeles Times ^ | June 27, 2008 | Erwin Chemerinsky

[Baron OBeef Dip]

The Supreme Court's invalidation of the District of Columbia's handgun ban powerfully shows that the conservative rhetoric about judicial restraint is a lie. In striking down the law, Justice Antonin Scalia's majority opinion, joined by the court's four other most conservative justices, is quite activist in pursuing the conservative political agenda of protecting gun owners.

If the terms "judicial activism" and "judicial restraint" have any meaning, it is that a court is activist when it is invalidating laws and overruling precedent, and restrained when deferring to popularly elected legislatures and following prior decisions.

Never before had the Supreme Court found that the 2nd Amendment bestows on individuals a right to have guns. In fact, in 1939 (and other occasions), the court rejected this view. In effectively overturning these prior decisions, the court ignored precedent and invalidated a law adopted by a popularly elected government.

What's more, the court's interpretation is questionable. The text of the 2nd Amendment is ambiguous. Its second clause speaks of a right to "keep and bear arms," but its first clause suggests that this right exists because a "well-regulated militia" is essential. There is thus strong reason to believe that the 2nd Amendment only guarantees gun rights for those serving in a militia.

[RebekahT]

Tell me something I don’t know. We never once read any portion of the actual Constitution in con law class.

[Reaganomical]

Though it’s not the case here, what if there was judicial activism (i.e., the political or personal desire of a conservative judge to pursue a conservative agenda with little to no respect of the law) that was ultimately beneficial to a conservative agenda? Would we, as conservatives, focus more on the principle or the result?

I mean, it’s obvious that liberals consider the courts a means to an end. When push comes to shove, would we act the same way?

[KC Burke]

Bravo to Bravo Sierra.

Twisted words and skewed meanings are the constant tools of Leftist rhetoric.

Scalia went miles to show timeless compliance with the understanding of the ratifiers as well as the writers and historical understanding. The very opposite of judicial activism.