Linda Hirshman thinks she’s being wise in stating why the Court needs to go to the left, but unintentionally makes the case for the GOP Senate to refuse to consent to any Obama nominee
After 45 years of conservative rulings, here’s what a liberal Supreme Court would do
Nothing separated the odd couple of the Supreme Court — the late Justice Antonin Scalia and his best buddy, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — more than their visions of the Constitution they both loved. Scalia saw the Constitution as a “dead” document, limited to the meaning of the original words at the moment the ink was dry, a moment when white, propertied men ruled. Ginsburg’s Constitution, by contrast, is the expansive charter of an evolving society. She celebrates “the extension (through amendment, judicial interpretation, and practice) of constitutional rights and protections to once ignored or excluded people: to humans who were once held in bondage, to men without property, to the original inhabitants of the land that became the United States, and to women.”
More
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.