Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by Skunk:
Given that the families are in dispute - I believe that this was a matter for the courts to decide: not for a politician.
|
Courts merely interpret the laws politicians make. [/QUOTE]Do they? What about the whole notion of substantive due process. The notion that there are rights contained in the "shall not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law" being interpreted to mean more than something procedural.
Substantive due process upheld the rights of a slave owner in Dredd Scott, and the right to contract (banning labor laws) that was later rescinded. Then it was used to uphold the right to abortion in Roe v. Wade. It's history first saw abuse by conservative judges, and then by liberal judges for the last 60 years. It is very much a valid point that this is judges inserting their morals in place of the legislature's.
So, in THEORY judges don't "make" law. But, in theory, judges are impartial and don't care which side wins. Pffft, riiiiight.
[ 10-23-2003, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]