Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

cascadiance

(19,537 posts)

2. Trying to rationalize that there is stare decisis for coporate personhood IS judicial activism!

Reply to stevenleser (Original post)

Mon Jun 29, 2015, 02:29 PM

Jun 2015

They used a HEAD NOTE on a court decision that DID NOT support corporate personhood that was authored by a court clerk who was a former railroad exec. That's my reasoning for saying that this court is activist! And money is free speech is also an ACTIVIST opinion by the right wing part of the court!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Would you consider this Supreme Court an "activist" Court? [View all] stevenleser Jun 2015 OP

I think the rulings of the last 7-10 days were not activist. stevenleser Jun 2015 #1

Trying to rationalize that there is stare decisis for coporate personhood IS judicial activism! cascadiance Jun 2015 #2

I have no idea where that decision came from and I am certainly not going to defend it. My point is stevenleser Jun 2015 #3

I think you are right that there was a political element to them... cascadiance Jun 2015 #4

Corporate personhood dates back to 1590 or so Recursion Jun 2015 #7

What does "activist" mean. GeorgeGist Jun 2015 #5

nope Liberal_in_LA Jun 2015 #6

No, but litigants have been increasingly activist Recursion Jun 2015 #8

People say the court is "activist" when it rules against their views. former9thward Jun 2015 #9

Judges are not Lawmakers, they are Arbiters. Theses are Lawmaker judges, superseding Dont call me Shirley Jun 2015 #10

I Voted Yes ProfessorGAC Jun 2015 #11