[swilhelm73]

The notion that the courts do not have the power of judicial review (let alone the currently assumed power of judicial legislation) goes back to Thomas Jefferson, who I guess now is a member of the radical religious right.

[MisterRepublican]

"...the independent judiciary we now have..."


Ha hah hahahahahahahahahah.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

I believe Sullivan is nothing but a game player. He has played conservatives brilliantly. It seems that he has a very high IQ and a very low moral sense. Knowledge (and craftiness) minus wisdom (and goodness) equals Andrew Sullivan.

[marron]

The confrontation with the judiciary that many conservatives are spoiling for, is not intended as an attack on the Constitution. It is rather the precise opposite, it is to stop what is perceived as an out-of-control judiciary that has assigned itself the right to over-rule the Constitution itself.

To say that judges should be independent is not to say that they are immune from oversight, or that they must therefor rule supreme over the other branches. Separation of powers means that any branch may be counterbalanced by the other branches as needed. Sometimes we have an out-of-control president, most of the times an out-of-control Congress, and increasingly we see out-of-control judges.

You use which ever of the three you can, to hammer the others back into place, as often as needed.

[farmer18th]

Hugh Hewitt claimed on his show yesterday that Thomas Jefferson was wrong about judicial tyranny, pointing out that Jefferson was not at the constitutional convention. I guess, in Hugh's mind, that means that Jefferson knew less about intent than Hugh Hewitt.

Hugh is desperately trying to save the conservative movement from people who take the founders too seriously. I wonder what Hugh would say about John Jay and the jury's right to try law as well as fact.