Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Look who's looking for a court bailout
Washington Times ^ | Thursday, December 26, 2002 | Bruce Fein

Posted on 12/26/2002 12:13:55 AM PST by JohnHuang2

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:59:50 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Hard-rock conservative Republicans for years have berated the U.S. Supreme Court for dictating controversial social policies by constitutional fiat. Abortion and school prayer are exemplary. Their sound track is familiar: Judicial restraint is the hallmark of enlightened judging; judicial activism means judicial rule like Platonic Guardians, thus shriveling government by the consent of the governed.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Thursday, December 26, 2002

Quote of the Day by Luis Gonzalez

1 posted on 12/26/2002 12:13:55 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Thugery by pen.
This mans logic would allow total fiat of governace to the unelected. Thanks for the post Johnny
2 posted on 12/26/2002 12:40:24 AM PST by steelie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steelie
Welcome, and Merry Christmas
3 posted on 12/26/2002 12:49:56 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Would someone who can understand this guy's English please post a summary? I have better luck with Babelfish translations of AFP stories than this gibberish.
4 posted on 12/26/2002 1:05:27 AM PST by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Boy, this guy is tough to read. Too verbose, or something.
In any event, the writer apparently fails to recognize that racial preferences, which are borne of irrational white guilt and vote-buying schemes by scumbag Democrat politicians, can indeed be ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court if such preferences in the public arena are discriminatory toward people solely because of the color (white) of their skin.

And anyway, Republicans using the courts to further their agenda of saving traditional America from the scumbags is a welcome switch. You just know that if a white Republican proposed half the things that Ward Connerly proposes, he would be buried as a "racist" by this writer, Bruce Fein, and by every scumbag liberal newsroom from coast to coast.

No thanks. Let the courts handle it.

5 posted on 12/26/2002 1:16:22 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steelie
This mans logic would allow total fiat of governace to the unelected

Actually, I think he is arguing the opposite. He's tough to follow but I believe he is chiding Republicans for not pursuing a colorblind society legislatively. He says that instead, Republicans are hoping for relief from the courts in a couple of racial preference cases.

6 posted on 12/26/2002 1:21:39 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nick Danger
Would someone who can understand this guy's English please post a summary?

"Republicans in Congress are too gutless to take a stand against affirmative action and want the Court to do it for them. Which makes them fans of the judicial activism they hypocritically denounce."

The point isn't too different from what we hear on FR all the time, it's just expressed in 'educationese'.

7 posted on 12/26/2002 1:26:13 AM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson