saturneptune
New Member
RevMitchell is correct in this post. There is a vast difference between review and changing policy. The sad thing is, when the Supreme Court changes policy outside the Congress or amending the Constitution, it takes forever to change, and has major impact on this nation (Roe vs Wade, for example). For years, conservative Congresses and Presidents try to chip away at it, but it still stands. These nine positions are very, very powerful.It is incorrect to say that judicial review makes policy. It simply reviews disputes based on law. If the policy is found to be inconsistent with laws then the judges stop at that point. But they cannot tell you to hold to a policy. That is judicial activism and that is unconstitutional. Civics 101 which apparently you have never had. This nominee admitted that she should not have admitted to setting policy. You know it.
While we do not know the whole story on her, one can safely say it will not make a vast difference in the direction of the court. The one leaving (appointed by Bush the First by the way), was liberal leaning enough. What will hurt this nation the most is if one of the four conservative justices has to be replaced (Scalia, Alito, Roberts, or Thomas) has to be replaced by Obama and his Democratic Senate. The only one of the nine that still puzzles me is Kennedy.