Obama Reaches Out to GOP on Supreme Court Pick

Owl- As much as folks state that the court is stacked with right wing ideologues, I don't see it reflected in the rulings. Could you cite one?

For example, the ruling to allow government entities to utilize eminent domain to take private property and give it to another private owner simply to produce more tax revenue for the government seemed pretty 'liberal'. It certainly broadened the definition of 'public good' in terms of taking private property.

Some folks were upset with the ruling in the Heller case (DC gun ban), but it was very restrained. Even the US Attorney General (arguing FOR THE GUN BAN)in oral arguments acknowledged:

"-- I don't want to foreclose the possibility of the Government, Federal Government making the argument some day -- but I think it is more than a little difficult to say that the one arm that's not protected by the Second Amendment is that which is the standard issue armament for the National Guard, and that's what the machine gun is."

The SCOTUS ruling stuck strictly to the issue brought before the court and just struck down the DC ban on handguns and storage restrictions (as it should have). An activist court could have used the orals, briefs etc. to rule far more broadly on other weapon types etc. Something previous courts have done- extended their ruling beyond the specific issue before them.

I don't agree that it's acceptable for Justice's to throw out precedent or the intent of those who wrote the law before the court and the constitution based on their personal political beliefs and biases. To just blindly accept that is to say that we have no rights.

If we accept that as the standard then our law has no foundation.

In reality however, Justices often tend to suprise the folks who appoint them regardless. It's why I would rather see the standard being the consistency of the law over time.

styrgwillidar of CA 10:06PM May 24, 2009