2 ms·
> For example, they have made the case for textualism so strongly that even liberal judges feel the need to fight on that turf. The "so strongly" part comes so
by dctoedt 3y ago
> For example, they have made the case for textualism so strongly that even liberal judges feel the need to fight on that turf.
The "so strongly" part comes solely from what Justice White's Roe v. Wade dissent grumbled was simply "raw judicial power."
- rayiner 3y agoMore or less. But in 1973, exercising “raw judicial power” in dispensing “Justice” was seen differently than it is today. It was quite interesting to see commenters who went to law school post 2000, like Vox’s Ian Millhiser, talk about Dobbs. Their arguments focused on things—stare decisis and public opinion—which couldn’t have justified Roe in the first instance, and couldn’t justify a similarly sweeping decision today. You can state the basic conservative position quite simply, as you have, but it took a lot of work to drag the law away from the notion of judging as an exercise in applied philosophy.