"Constitutional government" *is* "judicial activism".

[Donald Ian Rankin]

The whole point of constitutional government is that (unlected) judges can overrule (elected) politicians when those politicians pass laws that the judges thing contradict the (voted on) constitution.

Now, arguably that's a bad thing - I am far from convinced that the American system, with some laws that can only be changed by referendum, it better than the one we have here in the UK, where the government can pass whatever laws it chooses. But I'm also far from convinced that it's worse.

People who complain about judges overruling the will of the electorate, on the other hand, are in effect asserting that they *are* convinced it is worse, and they want to live in a representative rather than a constitutional democracy.

There's nothing wrong with that, but very, very few of them are actually willing to admit it.

[badtoworse]

1. No way. In the Bill of Rights, the constitution defines powers that the government does not have.

Would you seriously consider giving those protections away? I sure as hell wouldn't.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

2. Human rights here in the UK are doing just fine without a written constitution. N.T.

[badtoworse]

3. If your government deserves the faith you have in it, that's great. Ours clearly does not.

[Rex]

4. You've had a contitutional monarchy in place since 1688.

Seems to be working great.