A Quote by Michael Kinsley

So the danger of conservative judicial activism has been averted for another year. Stay tuned. — © Michael Kinsley
So the danger of conservative judicial activism has been averted for another year. Stay tuned.
If Americans loved judicial activism, liberals wouldn't be lying about what it is. Judicial activism means making up constitutional rights in order to strike down laws the justices don't like based on their personal preferences. It's not judicial activism to strike down laws because they violate the Constitution.
You want to know what judicial activism is? Judicial activism is judges imposing their policy preferences on the words of the Constitution.
It is true that there have been excesses of judicial activism.
I intend to go right on appointing highly qualified individuals of the highest personal integrity to the bench, individuals who understand the danger of short-circuiting the electoral process and disenfranchising the people through judicial activism.
The Supreme Court's most conservative Justices have presented themselves as great respecters of precedent and opponents of 'judicial activism' - of judges using the Constitution to strike down laws passed by the elected branches of government. If they are true to those principles, they should uphold rent control.
I believe I'm experienced, it's my third year, I know what to expect... Just stay tuned in at practice, watching in the film room, doing everything you can for your body to stay right... I don't even like to call myself an old veteran, it's only my third year, but I believe I know what it takes.
As Alexander Hamilton said in 'The Federalist Papers,' law is about the exercise of judgment and not will. Judicial activism is best understood as substituting judicial opinion for the command of law. The law is not an infinitely malleable tool.
We have a problem with judicial activism in this country.
Of course, conservatives always claim to be against judicial activism.
The beauty of my journey is that it's always been pretty unpredictable, so stay tuned.
Out of control judicial activism threatens traditional marriage in America.
Liberals attempt through judicial activism what they cannot win at the ballot box.
Our Parliamentary system has simply failed to meet the challenge of judicial activism.
Invalidating laws has absolutely nothing to do with judicial activism. It depends on whether the law is unconstitutional or not. That's really the key point.
If we're going to win in 2016, we need a consistent conservative: someone who has been a fiscal conservative, a social conservative, a national security conservative.
Central planning, judicial activism, and the nanny state all presume vastly more knowledge than any elite have ever possessed.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!