All too often legislative decisions are made because money talks. Moreover, the conservatives are excessively romantic about the legislative process. Prominent areas of conservative cheating include cases involving the First, Second, and Eleventh amendments. I am reminded of Friedrich Nietzsche dictum: “To have a system is to lack integrity.” A system in which judges do not make policy decisions is either a prescription for outdated stupidity (e.g., giving excessive weight to a history of racism or sexism) or an occasion for cheating on the system. And there the Court steps into outer darkness. Judges are just referees, say the conservatives, not policymakers. Why would anyone believe the Justices would not trot it out again? More important, the deeply rooted language is out of the bag. It is not at all clear how neutrality is compatible with the majority’s claim. The majority claims to be neutral about fetal life and abortion. The Court says that the rights to use contraceptives, to engage in same sex relations, and to same sex marriage are not in danger because they do not involve pre-natal life. Connecticut (right to use contraceptives constitutionally protected). Texas (same sex relations constitutionally protected). They rise, too, from a better informed understanding of how constitutional imperatives define a liberty that remains urgent in our own era.” See also Lawrence v. Hodges, disagreed with the Glucksberg test and pointedly observed that “rights come not from ancient sources alone. In upholding same sex marriage, Obergefell v. What this amateur foray into abortion history misses, as the majority well knows, is that the Court has specifically denied that rights must be deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition. Glucksberg) and proceeds to devote page after page showing that abortion was a criminal offence at various stages of our history. First, the majority primarily relies on a case involving assisted suicide which says that liberty rights must be “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition” (Washington v. The Supreme Court’s abortion decision exhibits a fundamental misunderstanding of the judicial role and our system of government.
0 kommentar(er)
