That would be Lee Rudofsky in Arkansas. In a voting rights case, he went looking for a reason to further dismantle the Voting Rights Act, found one, had the parties brief it, then ruled in favor of the issue that he had found. Which was just peachy with the appellate court.
For almost all of my life, I've read and heard the Racist Right screaming about "activist judges", especially when it came to dismantling segregation. But now that there are judges, especially Trump-appointed judges, who are actively making it harder for minorities to vote, that's just fine with so-called conservatives.
It is racism. It is Southern judges doing what Southern judges historically have done-- helping the neo-Confederates keep those uppity folks from voting.
And when they get done with that, those "conservatives" want to go after the 19th Amendment. Most of the states in the deep South didn't ratify the 19th Amendment until fifty years after it was adopted.
An Explosion Of Entitlement
2 hours ago
5 comments:
One might suggest, they go that far, it may have crossed
that line.
Then its who does what, and when.
Eck!
Funny how an activist judge can twist the law, innit? Piss you off too, amirite? "If they can do it us, they can do it to you" and all that.....
If we only had judges that ^judge^, it'd be a better world. Activist judges, Left or Right, pervert the law they profess to follow.
While the Left does it more, the Right doing it does mot make it any more correct.
All activist judges should be unseated and disbarred.
But now you get a look at what we have been saying for years. Doesn't make it right, but it is a lesson for the future. "If they can do it us, they can do it to you" and all that.....
Judicial activism is wrong. Legislation from the bench is wrong....even if it gets you what you think you want.
Was Brown v. Topeka Board of Ed judicial activism?
No, but many other were.
Don't try to deny it.
Other than Roe, name three and why.
Post a Comment