The US Constitution - It doesn't help

[D'rok]

Once again, I am blessed with D'rokian wit on a Saturday morning.

Is that an original, or a common jest up North?

Original, I hope! (But so close to true that I can't even take any credit for it).

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Why ask me? Why not ask JoeTheJuggler who claimed "The judiciary doesn't really get to strike down a law because they disagree with the policy. They are supposed to defer to the legislative process on those questions."

Because what I said is true. [ETA: Or at the very least, it's not what brodski was asking about.] You're the one claiming that it's not. I can cite case after case that are examples of judges exercising their judicial review authority based on legal and constitutional principles.

Can you provide even one example of a decision that was made by the Supreme Court that was decided explicitly as a matter of policy and not for a legal/constitutional issue?

I assume since you quoted me that this is your definition of an "activist judge"--one who is overstepping the judicial power and taking on the role of the legislature. So since you think it's a common problem, it should take virtually no effort for you to provide an example.

 

[Dancing David]

Nice dodge.

There are many decisions, I bet even some you agree with, nice lack of explanation.