|
How exactly is Brown vs. Board judicial activism? It's been a long time since I read that case, and I'm not sure I ever did. But I am aware it prohibits having separate but equal/segregated schools.
The schools, of course, weren't equal. The constitution plainly states that laws treat people equally. It seems that's what the decision was all about. So how is that activism? Sure it changed the policy, but it changed the policy in accord with the constitution, and not for policy reasons.
Posted on 4/27 5:35 PM | IP: Logged
|
Originally posted by Doreking:
How exactly is Brown vs. Board judicial activism? It's been a long time since I read that case, and I'm not sure I ever did. But I am aware it prohibits having separate but equal/segregated schools.
The schools, of course, weren't equal. The constitution plainly states that laws treat people equally. It seems that's what the decision was all about. So how is that activism? Sure it changed the policy, but it changed the policy in accord with the constitution, and not for policy reasons.
The court went against its principal of stare decisis and overruled Plessy v. Ferguson. That case determined that "separate but equal" was legal and didn't violate the 14th amendment. The decision wasn't based on any law passed by Congress; it was passed because the justices believed it was the right thing to do even though it went against the long established precedent created by Plessy and the cases that followed.
It wasn't based on a law passed by Congress. It was based on its interpretation of the constitution as applied to action by the state.
The holding in plessy, as practiced, contradicted the letter of the constitution.
Originally posted by Doreking:
It wasn't based on a law passed by Congress. It was based on its interpretation of the constitution as applied to action by the state.
The holding in plessy, as practiced, contradicted the letter of the constitution.
Google it if you don't believe it's judicial activism.
What is your point? I believe that laws should be interpreted as written, to the best of a judge's ability. If unclear, the intent should be examined. If a judge is weighing policy pros and cons, he's probably not doing his job.
Yahoo! Sports
