Activist!

From authors Paul Gewirtz, professor at Yale Law School and Chad Golder graduate from Yale Law School in May, comes this editorial published Wednesday in the New York Times.

They studied "judicial activism" defined by

"How often has each justice voted to strike down a law passed by Congress?".

I believe that is a reasonable measure. After all, Congress is elected by the people, so striking down Congressional law would be "defying" the will of the people, right?

So, wingers like to rail about "liberal activist judges". The screed peaked during the Schiavo travesty, and is a dull roar during judicial proceedings regarding same-sex marriage...

But what is the truth? The Truth? You can't handle the truth!

Thomas 65.63 %
Kennedy 64.06 %
Scalia 56.25 %
Rehnquist 46.88 %
O'Connor 46.77 %
Souter 42.19 %
Stevens 39.34 %
Ginsburg 39.06 %
Breyer 28.13 %

One conclusion our data suggests is that those justices often considered more "liberal" - Justices Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens - vote least frequently to overturn Congressional statutes, while those often labeled "conservative" vote more frequently to do so.

Hah! Seems the truth is the complete opposite of what we're told. Imagine that. Lets get rid of those activist judges!

But, all snarkiness aside, sometimes it's appropriate to strike down Congressional laws when they violate the Constitution. They've been given that role for a reason. The Constitution is meant to guide the hand of reason during crazy times. I would define a Republican house and Congress as a crazy time.

The real issue is the "lying" which causes perceptions that simply are not true. They are shameless.