Posted on 10/24/2004 3:13:36 PM PDT by hipaatwo
I'd have to take the position that there are appropriate sets of circumstances where courts are empowered to overrule the will of the majority, be it a body of legislature or the voters themselves, because fundamental rights are protected, and where the majority votes to usurp them anyway, courts can rightly reverse that.
There is a lot of abuse of that power though, and it seems like we see it in Oregon on a regular basis, where our mostly leftist Supreme Court can be counted on to overturn each and every good law (or even constitutional amendments) passed by the voters that somehow limits the power of the government, based on imagined effects to rights that do not exist.
This year we will be passing what we call Measure 36, which will put in the state constitution that a marriage is between one man and one woman. I fully expect our Supreme Court to declare this constitutional amendment unconstitutional, just like they have all the others.
I see, never mind the Constitution but what people Democrats are trying to tell them.
Right! And precisely the reason why scumbags like Breyer can never again be confirmed to the highest court in the land as long as there are at least 40 Republican Senators. The Constitution should never be "interpreted" based on the chic political correctness of the day, contrary to what Breyer and other liberal judicial activists believe.
Yes, that's a very good point.
We have the same abuse by our 9th Circuit here in Crapifornia. And the lawyers benefit either way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.