Wednesday, July 06, 2005

Will The Democrats Please Define "Activist"?

With all the rhetoric around the nominee to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, the term "activist" is being thrown around quite freely. In most cases it has been by the Democrats who don't want the president to nominate an activist. In articles like this we get

Nelson told Card that Bush's "No. 1 goal should be getting a good jurist
who won't be an activist judge" and that they would talk more once the president
makes it back to Washington, said David DiMartino, the senator's spokesman.

When I think of activists, I think of those working toward political or other type of goals. From the nominees I've seen Dubya propose to date, I can't think of an "activist" off the top of my head. Most appear to be pretty good justices who seem to try to intrepret the case before them within constitutional parameters. To Ol' BC, continous expansion of the Commerce Clause might constitute activism as would trying to smother the first amendment or the entire bill of rights.
I seriously doubt that we will see an "activist" proposed.

Just a thought, but how the MSM reports may be worth watching.


At 7:57 PM, Blogger Sir Loin of Beef said...

I believe that the term "activist" in this sense might refer to a judge who seeks to alter or create law as opposed to one who simply upholds existing laws. This may be a little general, but I have a feeling this is what is meant by "activist". I could be wrong. This is just what popped into my head.

At 11:55 PM, Blogger RightWingRocker said...

Of course, Beef, you are right about that. However, your usual left-wing stance typically supports activist decisions such as Roe v. Wade (maybe not that one in particular, but based on your comments, I would expect that you may support that one). I will allow that you do sometimes have a reasonable position on things (though, in my opinion, rarely), but by your definition of an "activist" judge, most good choices would be blocked by the Donks to the best of their ability (which I hope is not much).

It's time some real Constitutionalist judges were placed on the Supreme Court. Ruth Bader Ginsberg? Now THAT is an activist.


At 10:50 AM, Blogger Sir Loin of Beef said...

Wow, what a bunch of verbal diharrea. Can't you just say, "I agree,"?


Post a Comment

<< Home