Stupid judges strike again

kluge
Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:26:40 +0000

Just a thought here: Barrons, are you really comfortable with the idea that criminal law should be subject to “interpretation” by any judge to mean whatever he thinks it should mean, regardless of what it actually says? I see a real difference between courts taking a broad view of what government cannot regulate and a strict construction of what government can lock a person in a cage for doing. I feel a lot better with the idea that criminal laws should be required to clearly and unambiguously define what is criminal, while the constitution should be interpreted broadly on the side of the individual with regard to what the government can or cannot force him or her to do. Maybe you feel differently.