by Reynaldo Pulido
contact via: [email protected] or read blog at www.kenego.com
U.S. Appeals Court Rules Against Obama's Health Care Law
I have a question for those who applauded the ruling. The same people who are up in arms every time a judge declares discriminatory law unconstitutional or require that government afford gay people the right to marry. The cries are all the same: Oh judges are creating law! Judges should simply interpret law not dictate moral code! Activist judges!
To these people I ask: what do you think of the judges that declared the part of the Obamacare which mandates insurance unconstitutional, by your reasoning these are activist judges right? Why are they dictating law from the bench? They should stick to interpreting Obamacare not overturning it! Right?
When I asked this question to my facebook friends one them responded: these judges are interpreting law, they are not making new law about gay rights.
To him and all of you who may think the same way I say you cannot have it both ways.
You cannot say that judges who overturn laws you don’t like are within their duty and those that overturn laws you like (or uphold laws you don’t like) are activist.
When judges overturn discriminatory law they are not creating new law, they are holding the government to the standard set by the constitution, the part that requires that government treat all citizens equal. When the judges require that government stay out of people's bedrooms they are not creating new law they are holding the government to the standard set by the constitution, the part that ensures every citizen's privacy.
These judges are not giving gay people new rights. Gay people already have rights, given to us by the constitution of this country. What these judges are doing is recognizing that gay citizen’s have the same rights that all other citizens have.
These judges have been unable to find a legally supported reason why gay people should continue to be treated differently. They may seem like radical activist judges. However, they are behaving no different than judges have behaved for centuries - applying the law and its principals to new facts.
Our Country does not have a law for every possible scenario therefore our legal system allows for judges to apply law and its principals to new facts. And yes this creates new law and standards. And that is how we got rid of slavery, allowed women to vote and changed the voting age.
Regardless of how I personally feel about healthcare and the ruling I am glad to see the judiciary is doing its job. The judiciary is making sure that government is not infringing on individuals rights even to the extent of declaring certain laws unconstitutional.
Next time you find yourself disagreeing with a judge’s decision ask yourself is she applying principals of law to new facts? And most likely you will have to say yes. Then instead of calling her an activist judge find joy in the fact that we live in a country where judges have the freedom to apply the law to new facts. This ensures a vibrant and constant growing legal system and more importantly an ever more inclusive democracy.
Author
