LogFAQs > #966150281

furb posted...

The issue is sort of philosophical at its core. What is the rightist way to determine if something is constitutional? Does history and context matter? What does the document say specifically vs. what can be inferred?

We expect judges to employ their judgement. Some judges emphasize different things in doing so. The law is not always like a math equation. Instead there are multiple conclusions folks can reach with the same information whether acting in good or bad faith.

The big ideological divide is typically based on a textualist vs. living interpretation of the document.

You're not wrong.

But in this particular instance, we have judges who've openly admitted to wanting to make "liberals miserable"

In this case, we can confidently say these people are engaging in partisan politics and don't care about what's right