Just a quick note to point something out that I will be talking more about this weekend. Michael Hanscom pointed out a House Resolution to allow Congress to override the Supreme Court when the Court indulges in what the family values folk term “judicial activism”. What are examples of ‘judicial activism’? Try the civil rights movement, the right of women to control their bodies, and gay rights.
My biggest concern about the hooplah around Howard Stern has always been that while the ‘freedom of speech’ people are occupied with the antics of Mr. Stern and the new FCC fines, some very real, and very serious bills are being introduced into Congress by several very strong, very organized, and very united groups. They are not only working to get these bills introduced, but they are also working on putting people into Congress, and the White House, to support this ‘purer’ Constitution.
What’s more disturbing – Supreme Court Justice Scalia has come out in defense of a ‘dead Constitution’:
Today, Scalia – who is often add odds with several members of the Supreme Court – said many prefer to look at the document as a “living constitution,” one that evolves based on changes in society.
And as a result, issues such as abortion and homosexuality, which are not addressed in the Constitution, are discussed in courts.
Scalia’s premise is that an evolving Constitution allows personal interpretation on the part of the Justices when new issues arise, such as Gay rights and abortion. However, times change, and if justice is frozen in amber, we women would not have the right to vote, and blacks would still be picking cotton on their master’s farms.
I’ll take a living Constitution, even with the increased difficulty of ensuring proper judgements, than a Constitution whose inflexibility chokes the soul out of our country.