See what type of judicial philosophy Ed Fallone finds "dangerous."
Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Ed Fallone has never been a judge. But Ed Fallone is a very vocal and opinionated writer on a number of political and legal topics. The Marquette Law Professor has said more than a few interesting things that RightWisconsin will be highlighting in a new feature called "Quotable Fallone."
Without further ado.
"Moreover, while both originalism and the "living Constitution" are subject to abuse, one can argue that originalism is the more dangerous of the two - it purports to be objective and in so doing it hides its subjective biases and assumptions from public scrutiny. As least advocates of a "living Constitution" require judges to put their reasoning in front of the public."
-"Sticking it to the Constitution," September 18, 2012
According to Professor Fallone's shifting judicial philosophy, a jurist that attempts to derive the original intent of the Constitution or a law is "more dangerous" than a judge who decides that the law must conform to the times. This is baffling.
Isn't this the exact philosophy that has seen the rise of rampant judicial activism that erodes our freedoms and grows our government?
Originalism suggests that government ought to be limited in scope, that our government out to remain a government of laws and not men. It is very revealing that Fallone finds a judicial philosophy rooted in the intent of the Founders "dangerous."