The American Spectator
by John Haskins

11/08/05

Let's drop the talking points about 'conservative,' 'constructionist' and 'originalist' nominees. Such language obscures what's going on. These nuances are a polite way of pretending that the mainstream in law and government interprets the Constitution differently than we do. No. They are oblivious to the actual content of the Constitution, or they are anti-constitutional. A polite term would be 'post-constitutional.' If Ginsburg, Souter, and friends have a 'theory' of constitutional interpretation, they're keeping it to themselves. When they shake the foundations of the earth from their bench it is neither theory, nor constitutional, nor interpretation. They are, wrote Jonah Goldberg after one heinous ruling, 'making it up as they go along'...

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8985


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp