NO! I found a good case as to why.
From andrewcusack.com
The media claimed Roberts was breaking with conservatives because he refused to strike down a lower court's ruling that an Oregon physician-assisted suicide laws were constitutional. The Associated Press, meanwhile, judged Alito as "splitting with conservatives" for "refusing to let Missouri execute a death-row inmate contesting lethal injection". Because the media are generally in the same liberal camp as the judicial activism proponents they think like judicial activists and a judicial activist would think "Gee, Alito's conservative so he opposes physician-assisted suicide so he'll rule against it." But that's the point, you ninnies! The job of a Supreme Court justice is to interpret the Constitution not to usurp the legislative authority of Congress by deciding to follow our own whims, fancies, and personal beliefs. The Supreme Court justice must not say whether a law was right or wrong, or whether he would've voted for it, he must ask "Does this law contravene the Constitution of the United States" and if it does not then he is obligated to rule as such and to let the law stand regardless of his personal opinion of the law. Legislative power is appropriately invested in Congress, not the Supreme Court nor the President, and the seperation of powers is fundamental to the continued success of our Constitution.
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito have ruled according to the law rather than to their own respective whims. This is to be commended, and could set the tone for the Roberts court as a return to normalcy after the white squall of Holmesian jurisprudence and spark a concurrent deemphasis of federal power. We can only hope and pray it will be so.
No comments:
Post a Comment