Quote:
|
Originally Posted by guy44
Yeah, I gotta agree with Manx. The judiciary should not be a more or less vestigial organ of the government, existing only to settle disputes with generally predictable outcomes. The judiciary should be a full third of the government, striking down legislation that violates the Constitution (or a state constutution, or whatever) and playing an active role in the governmental process. I'm way way way way more scared of tyranny of the majority than when the Courts actually do their job.[/quotes]
1. Sure, they're one third of the govt, but they also have no accountability.
2. The Legisaltive branch is the only body that can make law, not the judcial. And frankly, that's what they're doing
By the way, and I'm just asking, what was your opinion of the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore? The way they actively interfered with the state government's right to judiciate itself? After all, elections are state business, and the Bush v. Gore court was very activist.
|
The USSC made the correct decision. If you look at what the FLA courts were doing, they were rewriting election law on the spot. That's not their job. The US SC came in and said that the FLA courts went beyond their duty. What do you think of it? Do you think they should have been rewriting the election law during the middle of an election count?