dagblog - Comments for "Judicial "Overreach" Since 1783"

Douthat is a precocious but

Doctor Cleveland — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:47:15 +0000

Douthat is a precocious but obnoxious thirteen-year-old. Everything he writes confirms this.

And yes, Judge Walker put the core of my case more succinctly when he wrote that "fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote."

I dropped by to link to

acanuck — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 04:05:04 +0000

In reply to This is precisely what David

I dropped by to link to Douthat, but DF beat me to it. I was going to comment on how fuzzy Douthat's reasoning is, but Greenwald says it so much better than I would. At least Douthat concedes most of the arguments being advanced in defense of Prop. 8 are bogus ones.

This is precisely what David

DF — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 21:27:07 +0000

In reply to Judicial "Overreach" Since 1783

This is precisely what David Boies and Ted Olson argued and what Judge Walker ruled. The arguments against allowing people to have equal rights have gotten increasingly stupid. Apparently, the "libertarians" at Reason have a mere preference for liberty, but they don't want it delivered if it comes in the form of "judicial over-reach." Rather, they would apparently like it if all of their precious liberties were put to a vote. When did so-called libertarians start preferring majority rule to actual liberty?

Perennial conservative milquetoast Ross Douthat, making a similarly stupid argument, gets the proper treatment from Salon's Glenn Greenwald here. Douthat's argument seems to come as close as you possibly could to an admission that equal rights robs the "in" group of their ability to feel superior. That's mainstream conservatism today.

Let's be frank: when people

Atheist — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:20:52 +0000

In reply to Judicial "Overreach" Since 1783

Let's be frank: when people claim about judicial overreach, they are complaining about courts protecting people's rights. Have you ever heard about "judicial overreach" limiting someone's freedom of speech, or depriving defendants of the right to a trial? No, the complaints come when other Americans get their rights.

In general, you are correct, but I can think of one example where I feel that the Supreme Court (the liberal "half" of it, no less), took away some of our rights: Kelo vs. City of New London.