Quote:
Originally posted by RoninLB
Perfect reply to explain your position and where it falls. You're a believer in Judicial activism and I just caught on to that.. thx.
|
Judicial activism is an activity wherein the court creates a government power that isn't mentioned or authorized by the Constitution. Any time the court, or courts, act to remove power from government; from itself or the two other branches, it is not judicial activism, it is in fact the primary purpose for which the court was intended in the first place.
Quote:
And so you're clear on my remarks as I wrote way way before. The NYT co won't be charged. The leaker will.
Just so you're not further confused the Executive and Legislative branches are beyond Judicial activism in theory.
|
No, that's certainly not true, if you want to know the purpose of the Supreme Court read the Federalist Papers, they tell everything.
Quote:
|
Judicial activism in Hamdan is your cup of tea. It's a perfect rallying point for those against the war on terror and presidential critics. If left as is the Hamdan decision legitimizes their holy war. Congratulations.
|
Again, anytime the court acts to restrain government that act most certainly is not judicial activism.