Skip to main content

View Diary: A Little Reminder About 'Judicial Activism' (172 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Conservative Judicial Thought (0+ / 0-)

    The best explanation for conservative judicial thought versus liberal judicial thought, I've read is from the 2008 lawsuit of the Ohio Republicans versus Sec. of State Brunner:

    The court said it expressed "no opinion on the question whether HAVA is being properly implemented." But it said that Congress had probably not intended to allow private litigants like political parties to sue to enforce the part of the law concerning databases.

    http://www.nytimes.com/...

    The law only gave government the authority to enforce the statute and therefore private citizens did not have the right to bring the suit.

    I think liberal interpetations of laws would allow people affected by the law to bring lawsuits, even though the actual law may not give them standing to file a complaint.

    So from what I understand of this, if I wanted to sue a company from what I felt was environmentally destructive practices, which hurt my land near their operations but the law said only the government can cause a company to stop activity under the law a conservative judge would say I did not have standing to bring the case, while a liberal judge would say the law implied I had standing because of the impact it had on me.

    I don't think conservative interpetation of laws push things which will always favor conservatives, see the Ohio Reps.v Brunner, or liberal interpetations of laws would favor liberal causes, such as the so called liberal justices upholding eminent domain for business development in Kello v. New London, in a 5-4 decision.

    I don't think liberals are pleased business interests can push people from their homes at below market prices, via eminent domain, which Ginsburg, Breyer, et. al. upheld New London, CT had a right to invoke for turning a poor residential neighborhood into a commercial area in the name of "urban renewal".

    I just wish the media would stop and figure out what each side actually believes and what the outcomes of these decisions mean.  The outcomes form different legal philosophies aren't always cut and dry to favor one side or the other, which is good since it lends some degree of impartiality to the court.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site