Quote:
I'm interpreting this statement as saying that you believe to it is bad for members of the Supreme Court to vote their values, but you also believe that it is bad for them to try and strictly interpret the Constitution. Correct me if I'm wrong. If I'm not, what would you say is the correct way to decide law?

Obviously, voting one's values without regard for laws is wrong. But, starting every other opinion with "The Founding Fathers intended..." is also wrong, and just serves as justification for imposing one's conservative values. How do they know what Mr. Washington intended, and why would that be relevant today? What Justices have is a text, however ancient, brief, vague, self-contradictory, open to interpretation it might be. They cannot help but interprete it, and one's personal values are bound to insinuate themselves into one's reasoning, but that interpretation should be made in the context of today's world, values, problems.

It's late and I am not thinking very clearly, but let me just say that I would expect of nine top judges in the country to agree on constitutionality of a given law more often: the Constitution is the same, the logic has not changed, and they live in the same world.
_________________________
Dragi "Bonzi" Raos Q#5196 MkII #080000376, 18GB green MkIIa #040103247, 60GB blue