[lbo-talk] backlash?

Nathan Newman nathanne at nathannewman.org
Wed Jul 30 11:48:12 PDT 2003


----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian Gregory" <christian11 at mindspring.com>
> My position against liberal judicial activism on the Court, including
> opposing last month's sodomy decision, dismays some progressives who think
> we should grab any win we can get.
-People (including Scalia, in his nasty comments on this case) have been -calling this descision "activism." What, exactly, is meant by this term in -this context? Is it intervention in the state's laws? Declaring that the -state had no interest in policing what happens in the private realm?

Scalia is a judicial activist, just a conservative one. Government is activist in many ways, but judicial activism has a relatively neutral meaning of judges overturning laws on constitutional grounds. This can be done in the name of conservative principles (property rights etc.) or liberal principles (minority rights, protecting dissident speech). In fact, this court is activist across the board in some rather dramatic ways-- Bush v. Gore being the only most extreme example. A few of the bigger recent decisions and how they'd break down:

So for a quick list of recent activist decisions: + Affirmative action decision that overturned undergrad system + Decision overturning sodomy law + Overturning Texas conviction for jury selection system problems + Limiting drugging of inmates to make them competent for trial + Striking down state punitive damages awards against corporations

Judicial restraint decisions + Upholding filters at public libraries + Upholding state systems funding legal aid through interest from lawyers accounts + Upholding three strikes law in California + Upholding Virginia's ban on cross burning

-- Nathan Newman



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list