The Master Speaks - Justice O’Connor

The Master has an excellent column, as usual, on the retirement of Justice O’Connor and her replacement.

The problem many Conservatives have with Justice O’Connor is that she was a “swing vote.” There really shouldn’t be any “swing votes” on the Supreme Court. The Constitution does not change, except through the amendment process. Therefore, a justice’s opinion of what the Constitution says should not “swing.” But, as The Master says,

O'Connor had no stable ideas about constitutional interpretation. Her idea of jurisprudence was to decide whether legislation produced social "systems" that either worked or did not.

But that, of course, is the job of the elected branches of government. Legislatures negotiate social arrangements. Judges are supposed to look at their handiwork and decide one thing and one thing only: whether the "system" the politicians produced comports with the Constitution.

Justices should not be unpredictable. Justice O’Connor’s swinging is not a sign of her pragmatism, but of her lack of conviction. We need justices who will fairly and faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of the United States. Legislation should be left to the elected legislators.

–J.E. Heath
Enthralled by my wisdom? Get more at per-fidem.org.
Comments? Email us.

Texian Weblog © Copyright 2005, Jason E. Heath