Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Toad case reveals Roberts as activist

Discussion in 'Legal' started by GunGoBoom, Aug 4, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GunGoBoom

    GunGoBoom member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,645
    http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/08/04/hilden.roberts/index.html?section=cnn_latest

    If you read the article in its entirety, written by a lawyer (somewhat of a scholar), you learn that what the author means by saying that Roberts is 'activist' is that, if up to him, he would (probably) scale back the application of the interstate commerce clause, and thus Congress's power. While it's true that this could be argued to be an 'activist' position, in the context of being a circuit court judge (inferior to a SCOTUS justice) at odds (arguably) with SCOTUS precedent, but at the same time, he is in fact by such a stance, only advocating a return to what the founding fathers actually meant with their *plain English words* by "regulate interstate commerce" (notably the Const. does not say "regulate anything that is remotely related to something that is remotely related to interstate commerce"), which was only extended to its current unconstitutional meaning by *activist SCOTUS justices* from FDR's time to the Brennan court of the 60s until it was settled law! So Roberts' position is really being as much "anti-activist" or activist repealor or activist overruler as it is being an activist. In any event, this is a good thing. It does show that he may be willing to stick his neck out and do what is right and Constitutional instead of just rolling with the popular flow. I'm starting to get some nice warm fuzzies about Roberts now!
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2005
  2. Coronach

    Coronach Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,109
    I concur, based upon that article.

    I like how he's an "activist judge" if he advocates a strict interpretation of the constitution. So, like, if the status quo is a bunch of activists running amok and you advocate not doing that, you're now an activist, too.

    Yeah. Right.

    And, if his view of the commerce clause is, in fact, as "microscopic" as that article says, I think we might have a winner.

    Mike
     
  3. Beethoven

    Beethoven member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    404
    Anymore, the term "activist" is simply a smear term to use when the judge doesn't rule in your sides' favor.

    If he'll uphold the Constitution TO THE LETTER, he's smeared as an "activist" by the left.

    If he's a communist like Ginsberg, Souter, etc, he's labeled an "activist" by the right.

    The term really has no meaning.

    I just want someone who can read and understand and NOT "interpret" the Constitution.

    WHY is that so hard????????? :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
     
  4. Lennyjoe

    Lennyjoe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,052
    Location:
    Southwestern Ohio
    Anyone hear about the Dem's trying to pull up info on his adoption?
     
  5. MrTuffPaws

    MrTuffPaws Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    Az
  6. CentralTexas

    CentralTexas Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,235
    Location:
    Austin Texas
    Whoa!

    Let's discuss this gay rights thing.
    1-Personally I think every American should have the same rights.
    2-Roberts worke dfor a law firm that did Pro Bono work, this was one of their cases he helped on.
    If an attorney does his job and defends a murderer are you saying it's obvious he supports murder?
    Even Rush Limbaugh gets this one....
    CT
     
  7. MrTuffPaws

    MrTuffPaws Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    Az
    True, and being pro bono, there is much haze around if Roberts support gay rights or if he was just doing his job. He did his job well though.
     
  8. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    What a radical idea!
     
  9. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    6,717
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Yes, though I heard it was being done by their daily newsletter, the New York Times. :barf:
     
  10. Kurush

    Kurush Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    I especially loved the line from NYT that it's just part of their "standard background check". The FBI does background checks, when a newspaper does it it's called "digging up dirt". Too bad they didn't do that kind of "standard background check" on Jayson Blair :rolleyes:
     
  11. buzz_knox

    buzz_knox Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,849
    Not really. When many use it, it describes a judge ruled by personal feelings and beliefs rather than the law.
     
  12. Vang

    Vang Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    Messages:
    91
    Any "originalist" is indeed an activist. An activist is someone who rules against precedent. I would call an originalist a good activist, but an activist none-the-less.
     
  13. publius

    publius Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,487
    Location:
    Punta Gorda, FL
    Almost any commercial activity may use out of state labor or supplies and advertise out of state. The market for almost any product or service in one state virtually always affects the market in adjoining states.

    In fact, an activity need not even be commercial to be regulated under the commerce clause. If it might affect commerce, Congress can regulate it. As Justice Thomas recently pointed out, this covers virtually anything.
     
  14. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    Thank you publius, well put.

    I wish someone would ask Roberts "What is not interstate commerce?"

    Actually, they should ask everyone on the supreme court and impeach all who answer incorrectly.
     
  15. publius

    publius Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,487
    Location:
    Punta Gorda, FL
    The answer is, if the Congress wants it to be interstate commerce, it's interstate commerce.

    The topic article mentioned the Lopez decision, and conceded that some (barely) reasonable people might just possibly have some sort of reasonable grounds for concluding that being near a school with a gun is not interstate commerce.

    What it did not mention is what happened after the Lopez decision, and for that it's easiest if I just quote a recent post over on TFL by Hugh Damright:

     
  16. GT

    GT Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    353
    Location:
    CT
    Roberts is a hard right constructionist.
    He also is a lawyer.
    Until they appoint non-lawyers to the SCOTUS we will have to deal with all the "gay pro-bono" stuff that lawyers of all stripes are obligated to get caught up in.

    He will be a much better replacement for the touchy-feely O'Connor, and in a couple of years I will be able to say "I told you so".

    G
     
  17. publius

    publius Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,487
    Location:
    Punta Gorda, FL
    Who Predicted This Result?

    Those predictions are not always so easy. If someone had asked me last Spring whether I thought it was more likely that Scalia or O'Connor would uphold the modern (New Deal) view of the commerce clause, I would have said O'Connor in a second. But that's not how it worked out. O'Connor went for a more originalist view, while Scalia swallowed everything the New Deal judges dished up.
     
  18. GunGoBoom

    GunGoBoom member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,645
    Yep, Scalia has proved himself a politician, not a scholar or jurist, particularly with Raich.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page