Reply #16: Textualist are undemocratic by definition. [View All]

As it was explained to me, the "liberals" on the court look for the legislative intent when reasoning their decisions. What exactly did congress have in mind and does it fit-in with our constitution?

The textualist, on the other hand use the excuse of rhetoric to follow their own conservative agendas. In Scalia's case, he's a fire and brimstone kind of judge and the more power he gives to the police, the happier he is. A strong criminal justice system with stiffer penalties is his personal agenda.

My point is that we vote for our legislature, but are unable directly to vote for the judges on the Supreme Court. When the system works properly, it is the legislature's job to make the laws, so our votes should directly be represented by their actions in congress. On the other hand, the Supreme Court's job is to ensure that those laws remain constitutional. What laws they make are only incidental to their judicial review. But with Scalia conservatives, we now have two branches of government creating laws. If textualist are not concerned with legislative intent, which they admit they are not, then they are concerned with their own agendas and are undermining our democratic process. Therefore, Textualist are undemocratic by definition. IMHO.