re: #553 Obdicut

That was a rejoinder to a question, not a long-thought out answer to what his judicial ‘philosophy’ is. Yes, I do believe that Supreme Court justices, whether or not they admit it, are doing what they believe is right in their interpretations of law. As I’ve shown above, they all consider consequences, the living law, and I’m glad they do. A nation of laws without observation of the results of those laws would be a cruel place indeed.

There are many times when the law is vastly, grossly against all human decency and the spirit enshrined in the Constitution, the goals that it clearly has despite the politics of the time.

Do you think Marshall was a bad justice?

Ok, i agree that i jumped on a rejoinder, thank you for resetting the context.

I think that Marshall ended up being a good justice on the whole. I think that his philosophy is dangerous, and that we were extremly lucky. I have no desire to nominate another justice who believes that we should do what we “feel” is right and let the law catch up.

I elect people to do what I feel is right, and I expect the justices to enforce it with an eye on constitutionality.