Battle for the Supreme Court: Judicial Activism vs. Restraint

[@bizbee14]

Thought provoking interview. Thanks!

[@cujonautics]

Libertarian as I may be, I have to disagree strongly with the illegitimate usage of substantive due process (what they call implicit 14th amendment rights here). There does not seem to be strong textual or historical evidence that privileges exist outside those specifically described within the Constitution and Bill of Rights. As much as I agree with the policy position of the Lochner case, the legal argument is questionable at best.

[@rherrold]

The federal assumption of preemption as to regulation on that constitutes a marriage relationship (judicially fashioned lawmaking here). The 'circuit split' occurred the day after the video was released. Mentioned about minute 14 in the video. The Sixth Circuit in an opinion authored by Judge Jeffrey Sutton ( well regarded, and largely non-political; not a 'hack' ... Former Solicitor General from Ohio ). If not altered by an end banc rehearing, this sets the mentioned US Supreme Court re-visit to the topic The book looks articulately written from a libertarian POV

[@RebelRadius]

If there is no right to bear arms outside the home, then corporate rights exist in public places and corporate rights exceed human (natural) rights. That about sums up the morality of law.

[@sweetroscoeful]

Aboot?

[@Buffalo122333]

Once again Reason deliberately ignores the most potent weapon against federal over reach. The tenth amendment. The supreme court is part of the federal government. One of the founders said something like if the federal government determines the limits of its own powers it will find those powers to continually expand. The states created the federal government and are supposed to decide what power it has. - “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.” ― James Madison

[@richdick9628]

Yep. The 2nd and the 10th. Those are the stop-gaps.

[@CrossoverManiac]

One problem: the federal government has the money and the guns. The states can scream "10th Amendment!" but DC will ignore it. The federal government has to be starved of money first, and when the feds loses the money, they'll lose the power. Then the states can tame that beast.

[@Buffalo122333]

CrossoverManiac The federal government does not have all the money and power. It relies on local LEO's to enforce the laws it passes. California is a good example. When you hear about a marijuana dispensary getting shut down it was the local cops who started and investigated the case and were most of the people in the raid. Then they hand it over to the feds to prosecute. When a state decides not to enforce a law the chances of the feds catching someone in that state are very low. That's why most the dispensaries continue to function.

[@bezlichnyy7675]

Interesting interview. Marijuana legislation passages by individual states like Oregon, Colorado, And Washington proves that drugs should never have been regulated in the first place. As far as judicial branches mostly have failed to review and interpret the U.S. Constitution correctly due to purposeful errors. Some judges act like they are not subject to the same laws as citizens, every time they violate individuals rights their own individuals rights diminish as well this includes every government bureaucrat. Or may I assume government bureaucrats are not subject to the same laws as citizens? Universal healthcare mandated by the government is against the U.S. Constitution, no one needs a lawyers or judge or even any legal authority interpretation--just read the U.S. Constitution with a focus on details.

[@ctwatcher]

All judges should be held to one term. What a joke this country is.

[@kenbob8293]

two terms,,, one in office and one in prison.

[@ctwatcher]

Ken BOB ;) You are so right! Except I'd give them more than one term in prison.

[@sleedolfine15]

This is a great country,not a joke.

[@ctwatcher]

sleedolfine15 Yes if the indoctrination takes. Once you know the truth about how they set us up to slave for them, not so great.

[@sleedolfine15]

***** We're not slaves. We merely need to reform the system.

[@RebelRadius]

CORPORATIONS (collectivists) require law to trade. Men do not.

[@rherrold]

... Regulation of what a marriage relationship is ...

[@georgecataloni4720]

Yes. Some couples aren't having enough sex, but don't worry, the government is here to help.

[@rherrold]

If such help worked, would that be a Fluke?

[@sojutime]

Keep Democrats in the White House and eventually we'll purge the Supreme Court of jackasses who think corporations should have the same rights as people.

[@richdick9628]

Or that people should have rights at all.