Comments by "John Woodrow" (@johnwoodrow8769) on "South Carolina overturns abortion ban" video.

The vastly more important issue is the unelected judiciary making moral based decisions, not which way they decide.
4
@KIA-MIA-POW The legal system implements the law strictly as it was intended by the legislators. Very simple actually.
1
@pwillis1589 Rubbish, just where in the US Constitution did it refer to abortion or same sex marriage? That was brought in SOLELY by activist judges, it was never the legislators intention that the law in question address these matters. FFS, activist left leaning judges are making determinations on 'climate change' in relation to just any law you want to nominate to shut down gas and coal projects. That is NOT their role.
1
@pwillis1589 And your flowery response saying absolutely nothing is a wonderful display from just another boring internet troll.
1
@pwillis1589 What on earth are you one about???? The original comment was should judges be activists and alter legal statutes to reflect their views on social matters, or stick strictly to 'black letter' application of the law and leave changes to the law to the elected representatives of the people.
1
@pwillis1589 EXACTLY as you have described, the 3 branches of power are the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. It is the role of the first two to make statutory law. The judiciary's role is purely to clarify disputes as to what the other two branches of government intended. Those clarifications become the common law. The judiciary's role is NOT for activist judges to twist statutory law into something never intended by the other two branches of government. To do so is an abuse of power. While I fully support a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy up to say 16 weeks with question, the US Supreme court was absolutely correct in striking down Row v Wade. The US constitution NEVER addressed abortion and to try and force an interpretation when none existed was originally a massive abuse of power by the Court. The issue is purely for State legislators to address, as much as I may disagree with the decision some may make. Whether or not I agree with a decision has no bearing on what the role of the judiciary should be. The politicization of the US judiciary is a MAJOR blight on a democracy.
1
@pwillis1589 "To suggest the current Supreme Court is overly politicised is naive in the extreme, it always has been political, and today merely reflects current American politics." My point EXACTLY. The judiciary should NOT reflect 'current politics'. It should be an impartial analysis of facts as they relate to the law, totally devoid of political or personal bias. The political bickering when appointing a new justice to the US Supreme Court clearly demonstrates the process is broken. To my knowledge, no other country on earth engages in such nasty political carryon when appointing someone to their High/Supreme Court.
1