Posts
This column picks up where yesterday’s leaves off: with Michigan Supreme Court Justice Robert P. Young, Jr., at a Q&A session of the Muskegon Tea Party meeting, September 28, 2010.
At any rate, Justice Young in an article published in the Texas Review of Law and Politics (Tex. Rev. Law & Pol. 299, Spring, 2004. 299-) had much to say about our common law. I want to make sure I haven’t taken things out of context, so please read it for yourself, here. Here’s how he sets up his argument: FULL STORY
STATE JURISPRUDENCE, THE ROLE OF THE COURTS, AND THE RULE OF LAW:
THE FEDERALIST
SOCIETY: PANEL II: A Judicial Traditionalist Confronts the Common Law
NAME: Robert P. Young, Jr.*
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I just posted this on the original blog:
So, you are declaring that Justice Young is "done" because you found a metaphor he used to be disrespectful to elders in general? That strikes me as someone who dislikes a candidate and is simply looking for something on which to attack him.
The fact that you were sitting next to Justice Weaver, who blatantly politicized her position on the court and used her resignation as a final way to screw conservatives on the court AND in Michigan tells me that you WERE seeking something to attack.
I heartily support Justice Young's attitude toward common law. It is the traditional approach to common law that allows judges to legislate from the bench. I have had my fill of activist judges. i applaud Justice Young for position that the Constitution is the supreme law of the state and our land. I will continue to seek more judges who do the same--as will any true conservative.
I was at that Tea Party meeting to personally hear the exchange and able to question Justice Young myself.
I ask him his opinion on Jury Nullification. You can read my article "The Forgotten Candidate...The Judge" at http://hellomichigan.blogspot.com/2010/09/forgotten-candidatethe-judge.html
I was not impressed with the instant change in attitude Young took for if looks could KILL, I would not be here today.
His answer to our group was not only wrong, it was an outright LIE.
He told us that while sometimes juries do nullify, HE wanted us to understand that in doing so, it was "CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE".
If that's true, then State Nullification is also "CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE".
Your statement that Justice Young's attitude toward common law is the traditional approach that allows judges to legislate from the bench makes no sense.
Post a Comment