Our friends on the left are up to DEFCON 1 over the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court and seem poised to attempt another Borking. The "debate," if you can call it that, will be a blizzard of demagoguery and little else.
Something that riles me is the claim on the left of a sort of symmetry in "judicial activism" on left and right. It is a highly elastic term, more often than not meaning decisions one doesn't like. but there is a real difference.
I'm not the first to point out that liberals have for decades promoted their agenda through the courts, with considerable success, and conservatives have rightly called it by that term. When liberals speak of judicial activism on the right, they actually mean opposition to that strategy. That is at base what has them worried with the Kavanaugh appointment: It looks like the party's over, and they'll have to win through democratic means.
If you take issue with the assertion that liberals have promoted their agenda through the courts, consider this from a recent editorial in the New York Times:
As hyperpartisanship, gridlock and a general abdication of
responsibility have rendered Congress increasingly dysfunctional, the
judiciary is taking an ever-greater hand in policy areas ranging from
immigration to guns to ballot access to worker rights.
There you have it from the oracle of liberalism itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment