Romney’s VP and the Supreme Court

Mitt Romney has pretty much locked up the Republican nomination for presidential candidate, so a more interesting question now would be who is he going to pick as a running mate? Since Romney is seen by some Republicans as being too moderate, his vice presidential candidate will have to be someone who is unarguably conservative.  Also, because Romney is white and a Latter Day Saint, a minority who is also an evangelical Christian would be worthwhile as a way of energizing the Republican base. If race is not a major factor, and Romney wants to go evangelical and pick a name with star power, he could do a lot worse than Mike Huckabee. Republicans like Huckabee and he is a former Baptist preacher.  And apparently he plays the guitar well. That might come in handy at fundraisers.

In other news, the Supreme Court has listened to arguments regarding President Obama’s health care plan that Congress passed. It has been interesting as the President and some in the media have said that if the Supreme Court rules the legislation unconstitutional  then the Court will be guilty of judicial activism. The President softened his criticism the next day.

It is unfortunate when words have their meaning twisted. “Judicial activism” is a term used for when the Supreme Court has seemed to arbitrarily redefine policy, such as when it banned prayer in school in the 1960s or legalized abortion in the 1970s. In both cases, the Court went against longstanding traditions. This is not always a bad thing–in the 1950s the Supreme Court desegregated schools, which changed national practices, but segregation was wrong. Anyway, this is what is typically meant by “judicial activism.” It is where the Supreme Court seems to be creating its own policy.  And by the way, in all three of the above examples, many liberals thought such activism was just swell.

If the Court declares part or all of the health care law unconstitutional, the Court will not be in any way overstepping its bounds. Judicial review, which is the power to declare laws unconstitutional, has been practiced by the Supreme Court for over 200 years.

When we get careless about what words mean, it makes it impossible to have a meaningful discussion about them.