Homestead mailing list

[Clansgian AT wmconnect.com]

> Biden was stating a factual condition. Even Congress knows that it is 
> inferior to the Supreme Court, which fairly regularly strikes down newly 
> enacted legislation.
> 
> Here is perspective from this morning's TNYT:
> 

Good article, but activism isn't so hard to identify.  

When, in my misspent youth, I was teaching sixth grade the father of one of 
the boys came to me and said his son felt as if some goings on or the other 
were unfair.  He said as how his twelve year old son had a keen sense of 
fairness.  So I said I was prepared to be suitably impressed, could he tell 
me of the 
things his son wanted me to effect that were to his (the son's) disadvantage 
but made the situation more fair for the others.  The father was taken aback 
and said he was there to discuss the things his son felt were unfair to HIM 
(the 
son).  What, said I, I thought you said he had a remarkable sense of 
fairness!  Sounds like he has a sense of what's best for him and he's only 
calling 
that fairness.

Like that, it should not matter what a Supreme Court Justice personally 
believes.  He or she will decide matters based on the Constitution and 
nothing 
else.  That may mean, would likely mean, that there will be decisions where 
the 
Justice is compelled by his/her oath to make one decision although their 
personal convictions might be that it should be some other way.  When a 
justice is a 
liberal and always votes the liberal point of view, or is a conservative and 
always votes the conservative view, no matter how far this bends the plain 
language of the constitution, that person is an activist.   But when they 
vote to 
uphold the plain language of the constitution although it might go against 
their personal philosophy  and idealism, then they are a justice.

James