Saturday, September 10, 2005

Supreme Court Nominees


Michael Luttig, who recently wrote the opinion upholding the President's right to declare a citizen an "enemy combatant" and subsequently deny that citizen any access to courts or lawyers, is reportedly under consideration for nomination to the Supreme Court. Which, to me, brings to mind questions of constitutional construction. Some constitutional context:

Article I, Section 9, Clause 2: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Which description of the judicial philosophy behind Padilla fits best: Originalist? Textualist? Activist? (Something-Other-ist?)

2 comments:

  1. Hmmm . . . probably more "activist" than I would feel comfortable with . . . but less than the folks that found the "right to privacy" in the text of the Constitution would feel comfortable with . . . except of course for the fact that they "liked" one of of the outcomes.

    CWD

    ReplyDelete
  2. So you're saying in relation to constitutional rights, "As the left hand giveth, the right hand taketh away" - and you're comfortable with that?

    ReplyDelete