It’s Time To Make The Supreme Court Boring Again

[Draggingtree]

:

It’s Time To Make The Supreme Court Boring Again

Today's strong judicial activism goes against the purpose of the Supreme Court envisioned by the Founders, and defined in the Constitution.

By Erin Hawley October 21, 2016

 

In the second presidential debate, Hillary Clinton described her ideal Supreme Court Justice: someone who “understands the way the world really works, who ha real life experiences.” During Wednesday’s final debate, she called for a Supreme Court that would “represent all of us.”

 

But neither time did she say a word about commitment to the Constitution or to the text of a statute

 

Clinton’s unapologetic call for judicial activism should be frightening. But truth be told, liberals are not the only ones advocating for “judicial engagement.” Debates over religious liberty, marriage, and abortion suggest that both right and left have abandoned the idea of judicial restraint, thus forgetting the Constitution our Founders envisioned.

 

The Supreme Court Wasn’t Meant to Be This Powerful

 

The Supreme Court was not always so central to American life: Alexander Hamilton famously described the federal judiciary as the “least dangerous” branch of government. The Constitution itself says surprisingly little about the court. Article III declares that “the