Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 16:36:38 -0500
From: "Charles Brown" <charlesb-AT-CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us>
Subject: Re: M-TH: Law stuff


Justin, Regarding below, yes I know you as a radical democrat, so I don't see how we can't agree on this. I said Stewart was on the liberal Warren Court. Now that I think about it, your issue of hiim being sort of funky on pornography since he was from Cincinnati and then that he was a centrist, make my argument in the overall discussion a fortiori.
    For the Warren Court was the most liberal in American history, and as you point out even that representation of the independent judiciary had conservatives like Stewart on it. So if is the best example, the institution of the independent judiciary is just not a likely locus of workers emancipation. Right now the court is busily undoing everything the Warren Court did in Civil Rights. They have perverted the 14th Amendment into a tool for protecting affirmative action for whites and men. A more typical tyranny of a minority.
      Charles

>>> Justin Schwartz <jschwart-AT-freenet.columbus.oh.us> 03/28 10:52 PM >>>

Seems that you and I are about the only ones to care about this, but what
the hell. The rest of the discussion seems fairly dull to me. As far as
sex goes, I'd rather do it than talk about it, and as far as talk about it
goes, I'll take Cole Porter any day.

OK, the Warren Court. Obviously its center, indeed its right, was to the
left of the left of the current Court. John Marshall Harlan would be on
the left with Souter and Stewart if he were still with us. You think
Potter Stewart was a liberal; I say, not with Warren, Brenann, Black, and
Douglas as the reference points. He was a centrist. Today of course he'd
be a lunatic leftist, occupting the position of Douglas.

More to the point you ask whether the current Court is likely to save us
from the tyranny of majority. Of course you know my answer to that. But I
don't put my faith in the Court or in thecourts. I do think that the
independent judiciary has a rile to play in this regard. Sometimes it
plays that role, as in Romer v. Evans. More often these days it does not.
litigation can never be a substitute for agigagtion. But it's necesasry too,

--jks





     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---