Re: Central Provision of Health Care Law Is Ruled Unconstitutional

On Tue, 14 Dec 2010, [email protected] wrote:
> The thing is?  As an attempt to use it to repeal health care reform it 
> it is.  If they only are going after removing this one part?  Then no. 
> But the judge in question was active in fighting the health care reform. 
> So, that makes him more activist than merely "upholding the 
> Constitution."  The Judge who overturned prop 8 was less of an activist, 
> yet the anti-gay marriage groups argued his opinion was invalidated 
> because he was gay.  By that standard, a judge who actively tried to 
> fight "Obamacare" is definitly not a valid candidate to be making a fair 
> and impartial decision here.

The way I've understood it, an "activist judge" is one who imposes new 
legal requirements and standards that do not exist within the law itself. 
And by "the law", I mean everything up to and including the Constitution, 
or whatever the highest legal authority in your country happens to be.

Whether the judge happens to be "active" on any side of a given dispute 
does not, in and of itself, make the judge an "activist judge".

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot