Have you bought into it?
2006-07-21 05:21:03 · 10 answers · asked by My Big Bear Ron 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Its not a myth is a reality, but remember it can go both ways. You can have a "conservative" or a "liberal" activist judges. Right now the conservatives use this term more often because they can point to issues where judges are creating law instead of interpreting it - thus being active. The same could, some day, happen with conservatives. It will be interesting to see if there is an outcry from the "right" when that happens.
2006-07-21 05:24:53 · answer #1 · answered by netjr 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Even if one considers that a judge does not have a particular political bias, he does have a bias toward law and jurisprudence, so he will think in special ways, and his decision is an act that determines cases and if he is a Supreme he will determine, or help determine, what gives with the law. Every judge is an activist in the end.
And there is indeed "judicial activistism." This latest crop of Supremes are very activist, busy undoing the decisions that have previously been done, as they have political views that are against those things.
But the inventors of the phrase "judicial activism" don't think they are activists when they engage in it, only when progressives or liberals engage in it, or seem to engage in it.
2006-07-21 12:31:44 · answer #2 · answered by sonyack 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What's that smell? Oh, right: smug liberal.
Of course activist judges exist. An activist judge is a judge who "invents" things - creates ideas out of nothing - in the text of The Constitution or other laws to suit his own political desires. Read The Constitution: nowhere does it mention "privacy". Read The Bill of Rights: nowhere do they mention "privacy". Yet, we now have "privacy rights". We have a "constitutional right to privacy" even though The Constitution says nothing about privacy!
THAT is judicial activism - just making up nonsense to justify your political activism.
Anyone who doesn't see this is either a)stupid or b)too partisan to admit the truth.
.
(... and before you start whining ... )
... from one of the few remaining sane voiceson The Left ...
.
2006-07-21 12:33:47 · answer #3 · answered by robabard 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Activist judges are out there who do make ruling based on what is right or constitutional, in most cases. Some judges support abortion, which I see as murder, which is as wrong as the death penalty. Activist judges exists for good and bad.
2006-07-21 12:26:19 · answer #4 · answered by liker_of_minnesota 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree I think it is just the right wing's term for a judge that obeys the law as they interpret as best they can. A judge's job is to rule on the law as it is and based on Constitution. Unfortuantley since the extreme ring-wingers hate freedom and equality they are pissed off when the judges rule that we cannot discriminate legally.
2006-07-21 12:26:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its a myth designed to rile up the conservative hoards.
The concept of judicial review has been around since Marbury vs Madison.
2006-07-21 12:36:46 · answer #6 · answered by bradcymru 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes it is. It is really trotted out by whomever doesn't like whatever any judge happens to have done.
2006-07-21 12:25:24 · answer #7 · answered by Loss Leader 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course it is, this is a pre fabricated term by carl rove for his Fuhrer
2006-07-21 12:25:24 · answer #8 · answered by Chuck P 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nah...I don't think so....
2006-07-21 12:25:42 · answer #9 · answered by texasgirl5454312 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
HELL NO!!!!
2006-07-21 12:25:13 · answer #10 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋