F R I D A Y , A U G U S T 2 6 , 2 0 0 5Desire V Duty On Supreme Courtby Michael in New York on 8/26/2005 08:46:00 PMLinda Greenhouse of the NYT (who gets to cover the SupremeCourt; I'm jealous) has a very good piece on Justice John PaulStevens, who is unusually candid when he gives lectures.Stevens puts to the lie the far right claims that justices love toimpose their will on rulings.One ruling that many people objected to from the last sessionwas on the right of local govt's to "take" private property.</p><p> Hispersonal preference was to see "free market forces" do theirjob, but Stevens saw no way to ignore the law.</p><p> Many statesand the federal government are passing laws to supersede thatright and they should prevail in the long run.The other ruling was on deciding the Federal govt's right toenforce drug laws trumped California's medical marijuana laws.Whiel Stevens absolutelyagreed with the desire of California to let ill people usemarijuana to ease their pain, he knew the right of Congress toregulate commerce was too important to let personal feelingshold sway.So two rulings, one that angered many (especially on the right)and one that angered many on the left.</p><p> Stevens wassympathetic and even in agreement with the protestors onboth issues, but placed the law ahead of his own desires.</p><p> Whatbetter illustration of a good judge doing his duty could one askfor? Judicial activism my ass.</p><p> AMERICAblog News| A great nation deserves the truth: Desire...http://www.americablog.com/2005/08/desire-v-duty-on-suprem... 1 of 17/24/09 7:13 PM
