Thursday, April 3, 2008

Court in the act

Not that I was really in love with the Supreme Court of the U.S.A., but Dahlia Lithwick at Slate articulates quite well the daffiness of the high court:
I sometimes fall for the old line that there's no such thing as politics at the high court; there are merely different interpretational tools. Not today. Today we have four liberals rediscovering the beauty of local government and judicial restraint and five conservatives poised to identify a fundamental personal right that will have judges mucking about in gun cases for years to come. After all these years of deep conservative suspicion of turning over policy matters to the courts, the Roberts Court has fallen in love with a new constitutional right. And while they don't seem much concerned about how the judges will manage it, they've just about ensured that judges around the country will soon be ruling in gun cases the way they used to rule on speeding tickets.
The law can be measured only in how much it serves your ideology; if it dips below your threshold, then it's time to change the law.

No comments: