Post: Post Reply: Excellent point, sieur. by LateForLunch

Original Message: Excellent point, sieur.
Marxists and "European-model" jurists especially sometimes allow their "judicial philosophy" to flex toward their own ideologies. I like to think conservative justices are more aligned with Federalist Papers-guided precedents. For instance, Roberts did a Swedish-style act of slackivism in affirming Obamacare despite an obvious Constitutional conflict in declaring the non-participation penalty not to be a tax (requiring Congressional approval) when it obviously was. Originalist is the way to go, in line with the classical republican dogma.

Original Message: Excellent point, sieur.

Marxists and "European-model" jurists especially sometimes allow their "judicial philosophy" to flex toward their own ideologies. I like to think conservative justices are more aligned with Federalist Papers-guided precedents.

For instance, Roberts did a Swedish-style act of slackivism in affirming Obamacare despite an obvious Constitutional conflict in declaring the non-participation penalty not to be a tax (requiring Congressional approval) when it obviously was.

Originalist is the way to go, in line with the classical republican dogma.

Back Post Reply

Name
  Register

Password

E-Mail

Topic

Reply options Notify original author     Private reply   All replies are private

M
E
S
S
A
G
E
HTML tags allowed in message body. Browser view     Display HTML as text.

Link URL

Link Title

Image URL