# The Mass. Goodridge decision was not judical activism. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 6, 2005, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360 "2005-09-06T16:48:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/21 "2005-09-07T02:11:57Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > What? Of course I believe that the case in Mass. wasn’t Judicial activism. You can’t seem to keep from referring to your belief that it was, and hijacked your own Calif. praising thread to say so, so I posted this thread. Tell me, how was it “judicial fiat”? > > P.S. I have no problem with arguing by proxy, since my case is so simple, so: _sigh_ OK - is there ANY case in the past 100 years that is fairly described as “judicial activism?” Does “judicial activism” exist? ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/22 "2005-09-07T02:17:24Z")
I don’t see how that would be relevant. You have made the claim, time and time again that _this_ case is one of judical activism. How about defending that claim, hmmm? ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/23 "2005-09-07T02:54:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK - is there ANY case in the past 100 years that is fairly described as “judicial activism?” Bush v Gore? :::d&r::: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/24 "2005-09-07T02:55:49Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > I don’t see how that would be relevant. You have made the claim, time and time again that _this_ case is one of judical activism. How about defending that claim, hmmm? In order to do that, we must first agree on what “judicial activism” means. In order to understand what you believe it means, I’m asking you for examples. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/25 "2005-09-07T03:10:25Z")
I don’t really believe it exists, and you are the one who does. However, let me look at wiki > [@](#): > > The phrases “judicial activism”, “activist judges”, and (colloquially) “legislating from the bench” in the United States, Australia, Canada and other countries with common law systems, are political epithets applied to judges who allegedly exceed their authority. Broadly speaking, judicial activism is the act of replacing an impartial interpretation of existing law with the judge’s personal feelings about what the law should be. The term is pejorative and indicates that the speaker does not believe that the judge is exercising proper jurisprudence. However, because there is no standard for what is proper jurisprudence and what is not, there is wide disagreement about what judicial activism is. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/26 "2005-09-07T03:30:37Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > I don’t really believe it exists, and you are the one who does. However, let me look at wiki Well, **Scott** , it’s going to be a short debate. You don’t agree that judicial activism exists, so it’s not going to help if I show that the _Goodridge_ possess any particular characteristics. In other words, if we agree that judicial activism is X, Y, and Z, then I would have to show that the _Goodridge_ case included X, Y, and Z. Since you don’t agree that there is any such thing as judicial activism, naturally you don’t agree that _Goodridge_ is an example of the species. We’ll have to agree to disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/27 "2005-09-07T03:33:20Z")
_Ahem_ Did you read my quote? It said, “Broadly speaking, judicial activism is the act of replacing an impartial interpretation of existing law with the judge’s personal feelings about what the law should be.” ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/28 "2005-09-07T03:35:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In other words, if we agree that judicial activism is X, Y, and Z, then I would have to show that the _Goodridge_ case included X, Y, and Z. [According to wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphabet), X, Y, and Z appear to be letters of some sort: > [@](#): > > The default Latin alphabet is the Roman, supplemented with J, U, W, and lower-case variants: > > ``` > A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z > > ``` ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/29 "2005-09-07T03:45:20Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > _Ahem_ Did you read my quote? It said, “Broadly speaking, judicial activism is the act of replacing an impartial interpretation of existing law with the judge’s personal feelings about what the law should be.” So you now enorse this as what judicial activism is? ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/30 "2005-09-07T03:50:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So you now enorse this as what judicial activism is? Not really, but it is close enough for government work, as they say. ---
**Author:** ![Talon\_Karrde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Talon\_Karrde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Talon_Karrde)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/31 "2005-09-07T04:49:02Z")
**Scott** , if you want to try to gain some respect around here, this is really not the way to do it. I suggest you either put in the work to actually present an argument, or ask that this thread be closed. If you’re going to open a thread in the pit to prevent hijacking, you still need to kick off the thread with an argument. ---
**Author:** ![Monstre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Monstre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monstre)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/32 "2005-09-07T04:53:38Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > However, let me look at wiki This is the One Cite. Forwarded by the Dark Lord Scott to the flames of BBQ Pit. … Scott needs only this cite to cover all debates of a second darkness. He is seeking it; seeking it, all his thought is bent on it. The Cite yearns, above all, to return to the posts of its master. They are one, the Cite and the Dark Lord… ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/33 "2005-09-07T05:29:33Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > According to wiki, X, Y, and Z appear to be letters of some sort: Alright you bastid, I just had water shoot out my nose. **Ice cold** water. I hope that joke was worth it, cuz now my ninja ferret death squad has your number! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/34 "2005-09-07T10:32:01Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Not really, but it is close enough for government work, as they say. Well, then what I said above stands, doesn’t it. If you don’t agree with ANY definition of judicial activism, it’s impossible for me to argue a particular case is judicial activism: I have no idea what aspects of the case to bring to your attention to show judicial activism. So we’re left with what I said above: Since you don’t agree that there is any such thing as judicial activism, naturally you don’t agree that _Goodridge_ is an example of the species. We’ll have to agree to disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Uvula\_Donor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e19adc/32.png) [@Uvula\_Donor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uvula_Donor)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/35 "2005-09-07T15:36:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > We’ll have to agree to disagree. Whaddaya know, Scott wins again! And that makes the score so far: Scott Plaid - 4,523 Everyone Else on The SDMB - 0 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/36 "2005-09-07T15:45:24Z")
> [@Uvula Donor](#): > > Whaddaya know, Scott wins again! > And that makes the score so far: > > Scott Plaid - 4,523 > Everyone Else on The SDMB - 0 He’s a myth _and_ a legend. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/37 "2005-09-07T16:13:42Z")
Just out of curiosity, what’s the deal with “judicial activism”, anyway? It was my impression the legislatures could slap down any bit of doggerel they wanted on paper if they feel a majority of the electorate will be placated, or more specifically, the fraction of the electorate that actually bothers to vote. The legislators can hold all the committee hearings and make all the speeches they like, but isn’t it a judge who ultimately has to look a citizen in the eye and try to explain to them that though the citzen’s action didn’t hurt anyone, or didn’t hurt anyone as badly as a bunch of shrieking lawmakers claim it did, that citizen will have to face major penalties or barricades or some other out-of-proportion obstacle? It’s the judges who are a democracy’s first line of defense against legislative stupidity when they say “this mangled trainwreck of a commitee-spawned law might satisfy some brain-dead trolls in the capital and their brain-dead supporters, but it’s wrong and I won’t support it.” Or am I off base? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/38 "2005-09-07T17:35:09Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > It’s the judges who are a democracy’s first line of defense against legislative stupidity when they say “this mangled trainwreck of a commitee-spawned law might satisfy some brain-dead trolls in the capital and their brain-dead supporters, but it’s wrong and I won’t support it.” > > Or am I off base? Depends on your point of view. What, for example, is democracy’s first line of defense against stupid judges? As in “this convoluted trainwreck of a judicial decision might satisfy some stunningly out-of-touch fat heads in black robes and their elitist clerks, but it is based on nothing more than my hallucinations of what is good for the Great Unwashed and I won’t support it.” If you see what I mean. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Monstre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Monstre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monstre)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/39 "2005-09-07T17:50:09Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > It’s the judges who are a democracy’s first line of defense against legislative stupidity when they say “this mangled trainwreck of a commitee-spawned law might satisfy some brain-dead trolls in the capital and their brain-dead supporters, but it’s wrong and I won’t support it.” I thought the executive branch was the first check against legislative stupidity. Having to sign off on or veto the laws passed by the legislature – the president, at the national level, deciding on the laws passed by U.S. Congress… or a governor, at the level of a state legislature… and so on. ---
**Author:** ![Monstre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Monstre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monstre)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2005, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360/40 "2005-09-07T17:58:12Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > [According to wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphabet), X, Y, and Z appear to be letters of some sort: Fuckety fuck fuck! You keep repeating that ad nauseum when I’ve proved you wrong over and over. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mass-goodridge-decision-was-not-judical-activism/320360.md?page=3)