Posted on 07/04/2008 12:09:44 PM PDT by T.L.Sink
Kennedy is the court's most important swing vote and its worst justice. He expects the nation to bend to his moral whimsy. He said "You know, in any given year, we may make more important decisions than the legislative branch does - precluding foreign affairs, perhaps." He was wise to include the "perhaps," in light of the recent Guantanamo decision. He went on to note how judges need an "understanding that you have an opportunity to shape the destiny of the country." So much for country's destiny being shaped by a free people acting through their legislative institutions.On any politically charged case, we are supposed to wait with bated breath while the famously agonizing Kennedy decides which side he is going to bless with his coveted fifth vote. Two years ago, Kennedy joined the majority in the Hamden v. Rumsfeld case that urged the president to obtain congressional approval for the system of military tribunals at Gitmo. Bush did - but Kennedy wrote the 5-4 majority decision in this year's Boumediene v. Bush striking down the system anyway! The signature of a Kennedy opinion is vaporous moralizing, whatever side he takes. In the Casey decision upholding Roe v. Wade, he waxed poetic about "the right to define one's own concept of existence, meaning, of the universe, and the mystery of life." In a 2007 decision upholding the partial-birth abortion ban, he waxed again, about "respect for human life finding an ultimate expression in the bond of love the mother has for her child." Evidently, Kennedy goes about his job unburdened by the fact that his views on existence or on the mother-child bond have nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution. Kennedy fashions himself an instructor to the nation. And he is - in the arbitrary ways of judicial lawlessness.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Anthony Kennedy is perhaps Reagan’s greatest mistake. I’m amazed that someone so ignorant and stupid is a supreme court justice. I’ll celebrate his retirement.
Which why Andrew Jackson, a few years later, refused to enforce a decision of John Marshall’s supreme Court—and easily got away with it. No president, no Congress today would dare to defy an edict of the Court.
Futile as it might be, I wish some congressman would move to impeach Mr. Kennedy.
Kennedy has appointed himself as King Of America and there is no one in the federal government with the will or backbone to stand up to bad decisions by SCOTUS.
There is some precedent for a president to ignore bad decisions (see Andrew Jackson), and much more precedent for a strong congress to correct an overreaching court through the legislative process.
Sadly, we no longer have leaders of that quality and strength so we are now the chattel of Lord and Master Kennedy.
The Supreme Court is a reflection of what sort of morals or lack of morals the electorate puts in positions of power in the Legislative and Judicial branches of government consistently. As the morals and sensibilities of the majority of the populace declines, so does the quality of their government in every aspect.
For a clue, refer to your nightly TV offerings if you want to understand more. That addiction, too, is a reflection of the sort of morals or lack of morals of the electorate.
Shame he’s a clamper
Somebody should read Kennedy his job description.
Is he the first internation judge on the court or was that Ginsberg?
international
The only DECENT Supremes where the black female singing group!
There is lot of tough competition for "worst justice" out there - given the fact that Souter, Ginsberg, Breyer and Stevens sit on that same Court!
Bozo, the clown died this week! Unfortunately, Kennedy the clown lives on, sitting on his pedestal at the Court!
The Constitution, Article 2 Section 2, clearly states that the Congress is superior to the SCOTUS, and can determine which cases the SCOTUS may or may not hear. Why don’t we ever mention Article 2 Section 2? Is Congress too wimpy to stand up to the SCOTUS? Do we need a conservative (not merely RINO) Congress to put this right?
The scary thing is that he still just the fifth worst judge on the bench.
True, but an unpredictable left-wing nut is even more dangerous than a predictable left-wing nut. Nobody wastes time worrying about how Ginsberg or Souter will vote on anything. Straight-ticket left, always.
Right - but Lowry said at least they were consistent lefties and had a predictable (albeit, wrong) agenda. But Kennedy is a pure fruit cake and is more like some nitwit who is flipping a coin to reach decisions.
That would sure help but I think term limits would be most effective. There’s nothing unprecedented about that. After all, we didn’t have presidential term limits until the 22nd Amendment. By the way, Mark Levin in his book “Men in Black” documents that we’ve not only had many justices who were not only physically and emotionally incapable of serving but actually senile! At the very least there should be some sort of recall or removal process. The way things are now the justices become gods on Mt. Olympus, completely unaccountable to anything or anybody.
This elevation of “the rule of five” to paramount status is a complete rejection of the Constitution. It’s an abdication of the authority of Congress. Our founding fathers are spinning.
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.