I don't know if we're on the same page here. Judges are not normally allowed to do whatever the hell they want, only recently in US history as we have moved away from strict constitutionalism to "penumbras" and "emanations" that created fictitious constructs like "the right to privacy" (which has nothing to do with privacy).
Normally, judges are constrained by what they constrain the legislature with: the law and the spirit of the law. Historically this even works for the Supreme Court because of the immense depth and thought required of a judge's body of work to be nominated. The inculcated schooling and philosophy of the judge directs them after appointment.
Realistically the left-wing Supreme Court judges are rubber stamps at this point. But this still somewhat (somewhat) applies to conservative judges.
I don't know if we're on the same page here. Judges are not normally allowed to do whatever the hell they want, only recently in US history as we have moved away from strict constitutionalism to "penumbras" and "emanations" that created fictitious constructs like "the right to privacy" (which has nothing to do with privacy).
Normally, judges are constrained by what they constrain the legislature with: the law and the spirit of the law. Historically this even works for the Supreme Court because of the immense depth and thought required of a judge's body of work to be nominated. The strongly inculcated schooling and philosophy of the judge directs them after appointment.
Realistically the left-wing Supreme Court judges are rubber stamps at this point. But this still somewhat (somewhat) applies to conservative judges.
I don't know if we're on the same page here. Judges are not normally allowed to do whatever the hell they want, only recently in US history as we have moved away from strict constitutionalism to "penumbras" and "emanations" that created fictitious constructs like "the right to privacy" (which has nothing to do with privacy).
Normally, judges are constrained by what they constrain the legislature with: the law and the spirit of the law. Historically this even works for the Supreme Court because of the immense depth and thought required of a judge's body of work to be nominated. The schooling and philosophy of the judge directs them after appointment.
Realistically the left-wing Supreme Court judges are rubber stamps at this point. But this still somewhat (somewhat) applies to conservative judges.
I don't know if we're on the same page here. Judges are not normally allowed to do whatever the hell they want, only recently in US history as we have moved away from strict constitutionalism to "penumbras" and "emanations" that created fictitious constructs like "the right to privacy" (which has nothing to do with privacy).
Normally, judges are constrained by what they constrain the legislature with: the law and the spirit of the law. Historically this even works for the Supreme Court because of the immense depth and thought required of a judge's body of work to be nominated.
Realistically the left-wing Supreme Court judges are rubber stamps at this point. But this still somewhat (somewhat) applies to conservative judges.