The court system of the United States is supposed to protect and uphold the Constitution, regardless of personal beliefs. Increasingly, over the past few decades more and more rulings seem to fall on the side of those individual beliefs, rather than what is written under law. This type of judicial activism is in direct conflict with what the court system is meant to be. Our government is founded on a system of checks and balances, but when a court has the final decision, who holds them in check?
After decades on the bench, Former Solicitor General of the United States, Robert Bork provides some interesting insight, “It’s a long way …, to a majority that consistently rules in the direction of the original understanding of the Constitution. In fact, while there may be a sign of hope here, if you look around the world, judiciary seems to be out of control everywhere. If you looked at the U.K. – the United Kingdom- and who is in favor of instituting judicial review- a written constitution by and large it’s the Left: the unions, academics, and people like that, which means that they expect- based on experience- that the courts will be to the Left of the public, generally, and give them more of what they want, than they would get from elections.”
Join the honorable Robert Bork, along with Senior U.S. Circuit Judge, Doug Ginsburg as they discuss their process for decision making, as well as what can be done about this latest surge of judicial imperialism, in the latest episode of The Free To Choose Media Podcast.