![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jebbypalIn Battle to Pick Next Justice, Right Says, Avoid a Kennedy
"At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life," Justice Kennedy wrote. (in majority decision for Planned Parenthood v. Casey).
The response of conservative critics? "What the hell does that mean?" Mr. Bork said last week, mocking its vagueness and its distance from constitutional text. "Obviously it doesn't mean the individual is unbounded by any law. So it must mean that the individual is unbounded by laws the justices don't like. It's simply an assertion of power, in a way that's particularly empty of intellectual content. It sums up what's wrong with the court."
*scratches head* Wait a second, I thought this was basically what "compassionate" conservatives (if indeed such a beast is actually reality) campaigned on? Don't I remember hearing the campaign promises of our current president saying that he trusted the people? That he trusted individual citizens to know what they wanted to do with their money? And that their money was better off in their own pockets than in the governments? And that education/health care etc were the domain for the state?
Apparently that is only the case when the entire nation follows the rank and file steps of Dobson and his colleagues. But if we did that, we wouldn't need judges at all right?
I'm truly scared of what will happen if this president gets to pick a supreme court justice. He doesn't value the idea of hearing sides of arguments and informed decisions; he'd much rather have the voice of god whisper the answer in his ear. The nation truly lucked out when Judge Kennedy was confirmed - he owed his career to no one, he wasn't an idealogic follower of either side.
Even when his own moral code is at odds with a particular act, he is able to set aside his feelings, look at the legality of the situation both in the context of the Constitution and the larger, dynamic global community that we now live in. I can only hope that we have many more future judges like him confirmed to our highest court. It's preferable to the fear of appointees who allow or assist any party in castrating our current system of checks and balances.
"At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life," Justice Kennedy wrote. (in majority decision for Planned Parenthood v. Casey).
The response of conservative critics? "What the hell does that mean?" Mr. Bork said last week, mocking its vagueness and its distance from constitutional text. "Obviously it doesn't mean the individual is unbounded by any law. So it must mean that the individual is unbounded by laws the justices don't like. It's simply an assertion of power, in a way that's particularly empty of intellectual content. It sums up what's wrong with the court."
*scratches head* Wait a second, I thought this was basically what "compassionate" conservatives (if indeed such a beast is actually reality) campaigned on? Don't I remember hearing the campaign promises of our current president saying that he trusted the people? That he trusted individual citizens to know what they wanted to do with their money? And that their money was better off in their own pockets than in the governments? And that education/health care etc were the domain for the state?
Apparently that is only the case when the entire nation follows the rank and file steps of Dobson and his colleagues. But if we did that, we wouldn't need judges at all right?
I'm truly scared of what will happen if this president gets to pick a supreme court justice. He doesn't value the idea of hearing sides of arguments and informed decisions; he'd much rather have the voice of god whisper the answer in his ear. The nation truly lucked out when Judge Kennedy was confirmed - he owed his career to no one, he wasn't an idealogic follower of either side.
Even when his own moral code is at odds with a particular act, he is able to set aside his feelings, look at the legality of the situation both in the context of the Constitution and the larger, dynamic global community that we now live in. I can only hope that we have many more future judges like him confirmed to our highest court. It's preferable to the fear of appointees who allow or assist any party in castrating our current system of checks and balances.
