Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Judicial Tyranny Lives Link: http://www.takimag.com/sniperstower/article/judicial_tyranny_lives#26448 Post contents: Mr. Piatak's appeal to original intent is not supported by the passage he quotes. (And the will of the majority, to which he appeals as well, is of course irrelevant to most constitutional decisions.) Justice Curtis is quoted as supporting "a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws". There's nothing here that implies an "original intent" approach; in fact it seems closer to textualism. What would seem to matter to Justice Curtis is what the California Constitution actually says (I have no idea what that would be) and the "fixed rules" (ditto) of interpretation, not how the framers would have felt about the constitutionality of gay "marriage". By the way, Mr. Piatak says the quote is via Justice Scalia, and I believe Scalia considers himself a textualist, not an originalist. Sent at: 2008 10 07