[Miss Marple]

Are you not reading the replies? He is a STRICT CONSTRUCTIONIST, which means he interprets the law as written, rather than making things up from imagined auras and penumbras and such.

The case in Texas regarding parental notification was a case of interpreting correctly what the Texas legislature had, however unintentionally, written.

I am always hearing from the Bush-haters about how they are only being consistent. Apparently consistency only applies when criticizing the President, and does not extend to looking at judicial standards.

[AppyPappy]

You are also dancing around the question. What is the difference between him and a liberal constructionist?

[CanisMajor2002]

Are you not reading the replies? He is a STRICT CONSTRUCTIONIST, which means he interprets the law as written, rather than making things up from imagined auras and penumbras and such.

Some of the folks here are just asking for evidence. We can't look this guy up on acuratings.com :)