Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alter Kaker

I'd say this is a conservative (small c) approach. If you try to get 9 very smart people to agree on anything in a case, it is likely to be a very limited agreement. This means the decision will be narrow and limited, ie. conservative (again, small c). However, if you are a Conservative (big C), and all you care about is the outcome regardless of whether or not its 5 justices or 9, then this isn't likely to be a favorable approach for Conservatives.


4 posted on 05/22/2006 3:04:54 AM PDT by nunoste
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: nunoste

You nailed it.


7 posted on 05/22/2006 4:33:26 AM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: nunoste

You definitely nailed it.


11 posted on 05/22/2006 5:32:11 AM PDT by Huck (Hey look, I'm still here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: nunoste
You are exactly right. Many Conservatives are no different than the lefties when it comes to their expectations from SCOTUS. Like the lefties, they also want outcome based decisions, albeit opposite ones. Conservative (small c) Justices should operate exactly as CJ Roberts is stating here - as narrowly as is possible given the law and the facts surrounding any given case. Anything else is activism - regardless of whether it falls to the right or the left on the political spectrum.
12 posted on 05/22/2006 6:39:16 AM PDT by Kylie_04 (not consuming liquids while posting since 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson