Kenneth.Mash at PO-BOX.ESU.EDU
Thu Nov 30 09:27:22 PST 2000
>Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 07:59:18 -0500
>From: Leslie Goldstein <lesl at UDEL.EDU>
>Subject: Re: Interpretation v. "amendment"
>my personal view (hope?)has been that the supremes took the case out of
>at Jim Baker's and others' attacks on the judiciary, in order to legitimate
>action of the judicial branch. I have hesitated to say this because of the
>obvious possibility of proving wildly wrong, but , hey, what the heck....
I think that this view has some merit. I think that they may possibly view
this as an institutional attack. Furthermore, this is a Court that has been
suggesting for the last quarter century that there is parity between state
and federal courts. (But, this too may be wishful thinking).
On a related matter, I have heard some argue that the Court might react to
the Florida Supremes' "activism" in stepping on a responsibility given to
the Florida legislature? How is this activism any different from the
activism involved in finding, say, that the Court should have the final say
in interpreting the Fourteenth despite the clear assigning of that
responsibility to Congress in section 5?
Kenneth M. Mash
Department of Political Science
409 Stroud Hall
East Stroudsburg University
East Stroudsburg, PA 18301
Voice Mail: (570)422-3273
e-mail: kmash at po-box.esu.edu
More information about the Conlawprof