Agnostic.com

7 1

‘For the first time since Reagan began stacking the court with originalists like the late justice Antonin Scalia, they will, if Kavanaugh is confirmed, have a solid, unbending court majority.

Kavanaugh’s nomination, no surprise, is a huge victory for the originalists, conservative legal thinkers who believe in a strict, textual interpretation of the constitution. They believe in adhering to the intent of framers of the constitution, white men whose outlook reflected 18th-century realities and whose thinking the originalists believe they have a unique ability to divine.

Various mainstream legal scholars, including Harvard’s Cass Sunstein, have shredded the originalist approach, showing how so-called strict construction of the constitution can be used to justify horrifying, retrograde acts like banning contraceptives, discrimination against women and blacks and to nullify environmental protections. Originalism animates Kavanaugh’s legal career and infuses his 300 legal opinions. It isn’t conservative or principled, as Kavanaugh’s champions argue. It’s radical and retrograde.’

[theguardian.com]

moNOtheist 7 July 10
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

7 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

I have always been amazed these folks believe they know the founding fathers intent. What unbelievable arrogance.

1

he is nominated for his views that the president should not be investigated nor sued and that is what trump likes he is scared to death of going to prison because he is guilty of treason and obstruction and so many other things illegal he should have been in prison years ago

4

And in the US this is called an independent judicial system?

I laugh when I hear about the "brilliant" legal minds that are placed on your Supreme Court. Apparently being a brilliant legal mind means making legal judgments based on personal politics and party leanings, and then finding arguments to justify the ruling. Doesn't sound that brilliant to me. Even to a non legally trained mind like mine I have this idea that legal judgments should be purely based on independent legal argument, not a person's religion or politics.

Of course, the rest of the world does not see this crap going on in the US. No, not at all. Right.

4

Originalism is just a bunch of chin music meaning "post hoc reasoning for the policy preferences I want to see enacted".

3

and down and down and down and down and down and down we [ you] go

4

You're right. Sadly, I think that it's only going to get worse. These people have a checklist of fuckery to perpetuate and that list is much longer. We don't have a way to stop them right now. The primaries will help to some extent if they swing blue, but we can't really begin to do good until we get back the White House.

5

It's not surprising that of all the people at all qualified to be nominated for the post, Kavanaugh is the one that has gone on the record as one that is opposed to the idea of a sitting president being tried for any sort of crimes. Considering Trump's inevitable impeachment for his violations of the emoluments clause and unending ethics violations, letting the defendant pick a judge that will go easy on him is a pretty significant conflict of interest.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:127611
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.