Re: Activist Judges

From: George Murphy <>
Date: Thu Dec 22 2005 - 17:14:13 EST

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carol or John Burgeson" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 4:43 PM
Subject: Activist Judges

> Pim wrote, in part: " That the discovery institute has to refer to his
> decision as 'activist' shows how well argued the decision must have
> been."
> A favorite mantra of the far right is that they will not be "activist
> judges." In that regard, I recently reviewed the book THEODORE REX (a
> copy is on my website at Here is what I
> wrote on that subject:
> Roosevelt understood our triparite government well. Today, some people
> rail against judges "making law." In Roosevelt's last speech to Congress
> however, December 8, 1908, he observed that justice was not a matter of
> "eternal verities," but of constant adaptation to human perceptions.
> "Every time," he said, "they (judges) interpret contract, property,
> vested rights, due process of law, liberty, they necessarily enact into
> law parts of a system of social philosophy; and, as such interpretation
> is fundamental, they give direction to all lawmaking." Some conservatives
> of the time (and since) have tried to disagree with this too obvious to
> miss statement.

Of course. OTOH judges who make decisions without regard for existing laws,
including the clear intent of those who formulated those laws, violate the
principle of separation of powers in the crudest way. They are acting as
legislators rather than judges.

Received on Thu Dec 22 17:15:15 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 22 2005 - 17:15:20 EST