James Taranto had a good take on Justice Marshall of Mass. at "Best of the Web" today (http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110006727 ):
Shut Up, She Explained
The woman who gave us same-sex marriage shows what she thinks of free speech, reports the Boston Globe:
The chief justice of the state Supreme Judicial Court said yesterday that rhetoric about judges destroying the country and the suggestion that court decisions should conform to public opinion are threatening public trust in the judicial system, a cornerstone of democracy.
Justice Margaret H. Marshall, who has been widely criticized as a judicial activist since writing the court's 2003 decision allowing same-sex marriage, spoke before a crowd of 7,000 at Brandeis University's 54th commencement. . . .
"I worry when people of influence use vague, loaded terms like 'judicial activism' to skew public debate or to intimidate judges," Marshall said. "I worry when judicial independence is seen as a problem to be solved and not a value to be cherished."
Gee, what about vague terms like "extremist" or "out of the mainstream"? Has Marshall forgotten the vituperative attack liberals waged on Judge Robert Bork 18 years ago--an attack in which her husband, Anthony Lewis, played a prominent role as a New York Times columnist? Is she unaware that Senate Democrats are similarly attacking a raft of Bush judicial appointees?
Perhaps this stab at humor casts some light on the questions:
Marshall began with a joke about the blue and white balloons suspended from the Gosman Sports Center ceiling. She said she liked the colors, which included "no red states"--winning a big laugh.
So if you don't like liberal activist court rulings, you should just shut up about it, but Marshall lacks even the self-restraint to refrain from partisan japery in public. Our respect for the judiciary is diminished somewhat after reading about Marshall's performance. Isn't yours?
Good, you should be worried, and I'm glad you feel intimidated by it.