Judicial Activism

The left in this country and in Florida cannot and will not succeed in establishing their liberal, anti-family agenda without activist judges–judges who legislate from the bench and force their social agenda upon the American people. Liberals have failed to get their agenda passed through elected bodies of government that are accountable to real people who have families and vote their values. Whether the issue is abortion, gay marriage, the pledge of allegiance, religious liberty or property rights issues, liberals must rely upon the activist judges who are seeking radical social change through the unconstitutional use of raw judicial power.

Talking Points and Basic Information

Iowans Fire Justices who Redefined Marriage
November 3, 2010
Bruce Hausknecht
In 2009 the Iowa Supreme Court discovered the right to same-sex marriage in the state constitution and imposed it upon the people of that state by a vote of 7-0 in the case of Varnum v. Brien.
The citizens of Iowa didn’t like that much.

Charge of ‘Judicial Activism’ in Healthcare Ruling Over the Top
February 2, 2011
Bruce Hausknecht
Citizen Link
The editorial board of the New York Times can be relied on to advance outlandish claims against conservatives on most days, and they’ve risen to the occasion once again with their latest criticism of the recent judicial opinion by Judge Roger Vinson in the health care lawsuit brought by 26 states. Entitled “Judicial Activism on Health Reform”, the first claim right out of the chute is this one: A ruling by a Federal District Court judge in Florida that the entire health care reform law is unconstitutional was a breathtaking example of judicial activism and overreach.

Prop 8 Judge Not Feeling the Love from Supreme Court
January 20, 2011
Bruce Hausknecht
Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the senior judge of the 3-judge 9th Circuit panel that is currently hearing the Prop 8 appeal in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case, is starting this week. In two separate appeals in capital punishment cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, Reinhardt’s 9th Circuit opinions were unanimously reversed (8-0, with Kagan recused) in language that accused him (and his 2 other colleagues, to be fair) of “judicial disregard”.

Q&A – Judicial Activism
Bruce Hausknecht
Citizen Link
“Judicial activism” is the term used to describe the actions of judges who go beyond their constitutionally prescribed duties of applying law to the facts of individual cases, and “legislate” from the bench. These judges create new constitutional rig

In Judicial Appointments, Politics Is No Match for the Constitution
By Peter Sprigg
The debate is not about whose policy preferences will be enshrined into law. It is about whether it is even the role of the courts to make policy decisions. It`s not about the purposes for which the vast power of the Supreme Court should be used. It

In depth Research and Articles

Five Judicial Myths: Talking Points About the Judiciary
David Barton
The Judiciary is not a co-equal branch of government.

The “Activist” Journey of the Florida Supreme Court
Colleen Pero
This study of the Florida Supreme Court was prepared as a result of several controversial rulings by the Court in recent years. The cases discussed here provide an alarming insight of how judicial activism can undermine legislative intent and compromise the separation of powers inherent in our constitutional form of government.

`Merely Judgment` America`s Courts are not above public criticism
October 8, 2006
William H. Pryor, Jr

Judicial Dissonance: An Analysis of Judicial Activism
Matthew P. Cohen
Southwestern University School of Law
This comment will examine the debate over judicial activism with a particular focus on commentary spawned from the recent U.S. Supreme Court and California Supreme Court decisions, as well as Bush v. Gore

The Senate Is Supposed to Advise And Consent, Not Obstruct and Delay
John C. Eastman and Timothy Sandefur
The Senate`s confirmation power therefore acts only as a relatively minor check on the President`s authority — it exists only to prevent the President from selecting a nominee who “does not possess due qualifications for office.”

A Tale of Two Constitutions
October 1, 2004
David Barton

Natural Law, the Constitution, and Judicial Review
Robert P. George
The concept of “natural law” is central to the Western tradition of thought about morality, politics, and law.

Witherspoon Lecture
Family Research Council
The concept of “natural law” is central to the Western tradition of thought about morality, politics, and law. Although the Western tradition is not united around a single theoretical account of natural law, its principal architects and leading spokesmen–from Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas to Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King–have shared a fundamental belief that humanly created “positive” law is morally good or bad–just or unjust–depending on its conformity to the standards of a “natural” (viz., moral) law that is no mere human creation.

Why “Natural Law” Still Matters for Conservatives
Rob Schwarzwalder
Family Research Council
In 1765, the then young John Adams wrote a brilliant article called, imposingly, “A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law.” He argued that the rights of man exist, “undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government — Rights, that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws — Rights, derived from the great Legislator of the universe.”

Websites, Books and Additional Resources
Men in Black – By Mark Levin

Moral Argument in Modern Times: A Conversation with Robert P. George
Monday, January 24, 2011
Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr.
This is “Thinking in Public”, a program dedicated to intelligent conversation about front line theological and cultural issues with the people who are shaping them. I’m Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., your host, and President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.

Outrage: How Gay Activists and Liberal Judges are Trashing Democracy to Redefine Marriage [Hardcover]
Peter Sprigg

Why Do Supreme Court Justices Shift Leftward?
January 12, 2006
Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr.
Authors Jon D. Hanson and Adam Benforado argue that structural, intellectual, and social factors all play a part in the leftward drift evident in so many justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. Their argument appears in “The Drifters: Why the Supreme Court Makes Justices More Liberal,” published in the January/February 2006 issue of the Boston Review.