Skip to main content

View Diary: Bipartisan Opposition to Roberts (198 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Nice (none)
    So now it really does not matter at all what the Constitution actually says.  Now the standard is "what is morally right/wrong?"  And Justice Brennan gets to decide?!  Lovely.  And here I was thinking that the Constitution is actually law and should be adhered to, and Justices are not supposed to substitute their moral judgments for that of the people.  How silly of me.
    •  Robert Bork testified the same thing (none)
      If a Justice believed that a decison was morally work, Judge Bork said that decision should be overturned.

      Also, do you honestly think any Justice's personal opinions are completely independent of their decision making?  Please.  It's hard to believe on any issue -- particularly those involving life and death such as abortion, capital punishment, disability rights, the infamous DeShaney v. Winnebago County Dept. of Social Services (1989) case, etc. -- that a Justice's personal opinion isn't at least a factor in their decision making.  A liberal's view of the Constitution is to expand justice to more people, and be limited only by what the Constitution prohibits instead of what it permits as conservatives believe.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site