WASHINGTON – Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., took a public stance conservatives may find provocative Tuesday, declaring, “I am a judicial activist.”
He did add an important caveat, saying he favored judicial activism only when needed to overturn “bad laws,” those that threaten freedom, and cited examples such as laws enforcing racial segregation.
But the point the senator was trying to make was that conservatives should not reflexively dismiss the need for judicial activism at certain times.
Paul told the audience he was “not trying to convert you, but we should think about it.”
“No, I don’t want judges writing laws, but I want them protecting my liberty,” he said.
Addressing the Heritage Foundation’s summit on “Opportunity for all, favoritism for all,” Paul cited Obamacare as a case in which judicial activism should have been employed.
Saying, “Whether he believes it or not, I don’t know,” Paul cited U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts argument of judicial restraint in his decision not to rule Obamacare unconstitutional.
Paul summarized Robert’s argument as: We have to presume the majority is correct and the law is constitutional until proven otherwise. The senator said Roberts was citing former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes credo, “We should not get in the way of the majority.”
Written by GARTH KANT
Read more at WND