Conservatives v. Libertarians The debate over judicial activism divides former allies.

reason.com ^ | July 2010 | Damon W. Root

[pangenesis]

They don’t understand the concept of liberty anymore than the Left.

Amen. even the teabaggers don't understand true liberty; they are just tools of a couple of billionaire lobbyists. It's an embarrassment to any true libertarian.

[neverdem]

BTTT!

[DB]

Judge J. Harvey Wilkinson III needs to learn that the rights defined in the constitution are not dependent on the ballot box. Just because a majority wants to take someones constitutional rights doesn’t legitimize their demands.

[DB]

And your crude arrogant way will gain you nothing but contempt.

[walford]

bookmark for later

[Daveinyork]

I do not consider it judicial activism if the court makes sure that laws conform to the Constitution and original intent. What is jusicial activism is making new rights that are actually entitlements that infringe on the Constitutional rights of others.

An example was the court forcing Kansas City schools to bus across district lines, and then forcing the schools to raise taxes to pay for it.

[ExSoldier]

Bookmark.

[ModelBreaker]

Overturning cases that grossly misinterpret the constitution is not activism. It’s going to take quite a bit of that to get to a conservative interpretation of the Consitution.

[Mojave]

He added that the National Rifle Association “held their nose and jumped in bed with substantive due process. Who would have imagined a leading conservative group doing that?”

Unfortunately, there are far too many ignoramuses calling themselves conservatives.