I decided to do a little research on Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who had attended Yale and had a pretty normal upbringing, and found that his philosophy is on the conservative side, but with a bit of a liberal streak showing up in sometimes surprising cases. For example, he wrote a dissenting opinion on the United States v. Rybar, in which the government had banned private citizens from owning submachine guns, and in which Alito disagreed on the decision, stating that such a ban violated the Commerce Clause and the Second Amendment- a pro-gun stance that is widely seen as a conservative ideal. However, in the case of death row inmate Michael Taylor, he voted against the state of Missouri’s request to strike down the stay of execution so that Taylor could be executed, a move seen by some conservatives as a more liberal stance. For the most part, I would, like many people, wither agree or disagree with his philosophy on a case by case basis. There are some cases in which the more conservative view is appropriate, and then there are others in which a more liberal view is appropriate- but for the most part, I can agree with his philosophy on most cases.
Judicial review is a power best used on a regular basis. If laws are passed by Congress or the president that could have the potential in being unconstitutional and thus unjust, then the Supreme Court should scrutinize every law to make sure that it is within constitutional parameters of the government. As well, this can prevent possible problems in the future that arise from the laws, and can save millions of dollars in legal fees that never even have to happen if the Supreme Court exercises its right of judicial review regularly.
I believe that the High Court should interpret the Constitution in reference to the changes in society and technology, on the basis that society has changed drastically since the time of the Framers and that there are far more issues that need to be addressed than there were before. The population has grown and the United States have become something more than what the Framers could have possibly dreamed of, and the rest of the world has changed as well, with globalization increasing amongst many world countries. The United States has become deeply rooted in foreign problems as well as domestic problems that were not seen as the government’s business during the Framer’s era. As well, in interpreting a living Constitution, the Court may also help the government’s laws adapt to the ever changing whims of society.
I commented on Gabriel Miller, Melissa Ray, and Ashley Pelfrey’s blogs.
