Comments by "No Fate But What We Make" (@SonoftheAllfather) on "Eviction Moratorium Stands in SCOTUS Ruling, But Majority Opinion Says CDC Exceeded Authority" video.

  1.  mark tamayo  Justices aren't hired, they're appointed for life. And the only principle they're supposed to uphold is the law. Those who don't interpret the law through an activistic lens (and draw whatever meaning that's convenient to their political agenda) are called "strict constructionists," but are also called "conservative." That's how perverse and subverted the legal system has become: judges who actually interpret the law based on its literal meaning are called "conservative."
    12
  2.  @duncanmcokiner4242  The Right should mention them more often in a critical light, instead of just shilling and making excuses for them. But yeah, this doesn't really have much to do with them.
    7
  3.  mark tamayo  If the only reason you think they were chosen is to drive a particular partisan political agenda, you don't understand the way the judiciary is supposed to function. It isn't supposed to be some rubber stamping appendage of the legislature. It's job is to apolitically interpret the law. The Left has subverted the entire legal system though, which is evidenced by the fact that justices who merely aren't activistic (interpret the law literally instead of subjectively) are called "conservative." All of them should be "strict constructionists" in reality. But the Left made that impossible by planting political operatives into the courts.
    5
  4.  mark tamayo  I don't. That's the whole point of my argument, which seems to be alluding you.
    1
  5.  mark tamayo  No...clearly your reading comprehension is that of a public school dropout, but I'll try one last time. What I'm saying is that what the leftist establishment calls a "conservative" justice is basically just a justice who literally interprets and upholds the law. It doesn't have anything to do with having conservative political opinions. Conservatives get mad when "conservative" justices don't interpret the law in an activistic way because they fail to understand what a "conservative" justice actually is: a strict constructionist.
    1