I keep saying that the uninformed always attack decisions they see as activist as liberal abuses, but decisions, such as the Heller case, which was activist in expanding the II Amendment, and the recent voting rights act decision, eviscerating the act show that activism isn't limited to the left wing.
Do you seriously want to compare making up doctrines out of whole cloth like Abortion out of a bizarre compilations of amendments to defining the details of something clearly mandated under the constitution (gun rights)? One has a textual basis, the other does not.
If things are so flexible under your view of the constitution, what exactly was wrong with Lochner or the Slaughter house cases? Is it just a ideological litmus test of "i agree with this policy"? Because I agree with underlying substance of Lochner, but realize it was legislating from the bench and hence wrong. Those like me will try to convince the public and change policy through the political process- not encourage philosopher kings.
Last edited by LittleNicky; 09/26/1310:11 PM.
Should probably ask Mr. Kierney. I guess if you're Italian, you should be in prison. I've read the RICO Act, and I can tell you it's more appropriate... for some of those guys over in Washington than it is for me or any of my fellas here
