If striking down Obamacare is judicial activism

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Quantum Windbag, Jun 5, 2012.

  1. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    ...why is striking down Doma not judicial activism?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Grampa Murked U
    Offline

    Grampa Murked U Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    Messages:
    47,715
    Thanks Received:
    8,798
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Ratings:
    +23,970
    Lol

    Don't see too many threads with the thread killer in the first post. Well done.
     
  3. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,584
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,677
    Got it backwards, don't you? If striking down DOMA is judicial activism, why isn't it the same for the health care act? It's the CONS that worry about judicial activism all the time, not the LIBS.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,594
    Thanks Received:
    5,909
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,021
    Questions of Constitutional acceptance is not Judicial activism. Judges declaring things not in a law as part of a law or not part of law is.

    Neither case fits the claim and both will be decided by the Supreme Court.

    In the case of DOMA I happen to agree that IF a State has declared a marriage legal then those allowed to marry should reap ALL the benefits of said union.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. DGS49
    Offline

    DGS49 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2012
    Messages:
    3,973
    Thanks Received:
    792
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Ratings:
    +2,261
    Marriage is the province of the States. The feds cannot refuse to accept that status because it is not a federal issue. It would be like the Feds refusing to acknowledge a transfer of real estate, or accept a state driver's license.

    Judicial activism: Finding that a longstanding provision in the Massachusetts constitution prohibits the Commonwealth from refusing to "marry" people of the same gender. Now THAT'S judicial activism.
     
  6. Conservative
    Offline

    Conservative Type 40

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    17,082
    Thanks Received:
    2,026
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Ratings:
    +2,030
    Because one is unconstitutional, and the other is.... um...


    it's just different!
     
  7. Conservative
    Offline

    Conservative Type 40

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    17,082
    Thanks Received:
    2,026
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Ratings:
    +2,030
    Obama Warns Supreme Court Against Judicial Activism

    you were saying???
     
  8. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    Nope, because I never said striking down a law is judicial activism.
     
  9. Katzndogz
    Offline

    Katzndogz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    65,659
    Thanks Received:
    7,418
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +8,338
    Judicial activism is where the court legislates from the bench and usurps matters which are properly the function of the legislature or of the voters.
     
  10. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,933
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,869
    The states, however, are subject to the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment. However they might configure their marriage laws, property law, or even laws regulating issuance of a driver’s license, each citizen must have equal access to those laws.

    It’s a Federal issue to the extent the states are subject to the Federal Constitution.

    There is no such thing as ‘judicial activism,’ it’s a contrivance of the right.

    Rather, the issue is the hypocrisy and inconsistency on the part of conservatives, where they whine about laws they support being overturned as a consequence of ‘judicial activism,’ yet applaud those exact same courts when a law they’re opposed to is invalidated.

    It’s part of the victimhood culture of conservatism.
     

Share This Page