Posted on

 November 1, 2008 in 

“We want judges who interpret law, not make law.” is ignorant right-wing hogwash.

We all agree that law needs interpretation. It rarely springs fully-formed from the legislature, so that its meaning is clear to all who read it. Even the U.S. Constitution needs interpretation — it doesn’t explicitly address every conceivable situation.

So we do indeed want judges who interpret the law. But interpreting law is making law. The law is what the legislature says it is, as interpreted by the judiciary and as enforced by the executive. Every judicial decision — even those with which the right wing disagrees — is an interpretation of the law.

If the legislature thinks the judiciary has misinterpreted a statute, it can (and is expected by the courts to) rewrite the statute. If the People think the judiciary has misinterpreted the Constitution (for example, by finding a right that the People don’t think that document guarantees or should guarantee), the People can amend the Constitution.

“Judges who make law” are judges whose interpretations of the law gore the right-wing ox.

Share This Post, Choose Your Platform!

4 Comments

  1. sctexas November 2, 2008 at 10:08 am - Reply

    “Judges who make law” are judges whose interpretations of the law gore the right-wing ox.’

    Truer words were never spoken.

  2. S November 2, 2008 at 12:08 pm - Reply

    Well said, sir!

  3. Political Right-Wingers November 20, 2008 at 11:05 pm - Reply

    After reading this post, you sound exactly like a lawyer.

  4. Mark Bennett November 21, 2008 at 8:41 am - Reply

    No shit?

    It’s entirely possible that I sounded exactly like a lawyer before reading this post, grammarboy.

    Because — and you might have figured this out if you, say, read the title of the blog — I am a lawyer.

Leave A Comment

Recent Blog Posts

Categories

Archive