On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Aimee Farr wrote:
Senate hearings in which candidates for federal judge or Supreme Court justice are grilled about which rights they believe are in the Constitution. Eventually, voters will choose and demand judges based not on their ability to interpret the Constitution but on the political positions they hold, he warned.<snip>
The Supreme Court isn't supposed to be interpreting the Constitution per se, they're supposed to be deciding if laws passed by Congress are constitutional. Two different animals. Last time I checked Scalia had no problem ignoring ...shall make no law... He certainly isn't bitching about the IR search violations of the 4th. I don't believe he was in the opposition to the 'assisted suicide' ruling which states that there is no right in the Constition in this regards. In direct contradiction to both the 9th and 10th. Scalia is a hypocrite. ____________________________________________________________________ If the law is based on precedence, why is the Constitution not the final precedence since it's the primary authority? The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------