CNN Breaking News — Federal judge in New Orleans, Louisiana, blocks six-month federal moratorium on deepwater drilling in Gulf. … Money quote: “The Court is unable to divine or fathom a relationship between [Interior’s] findings and the immense scope of the moratorium.” … On a very quick skim, seems poorly written & activist-ish. RT @MelissaTweets Read the ruling blocking Gulf moratorium: http://bit.ly/dzqTse
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM!! CONSERVATIVES REJOICE!! Wait, what?
Actually, I have no idea the grounds for this ruling, or whether it’s good or bad, justifiable or unjustifiable — no clue. Still, there’s a certain irony in the way the reaction is likely to break down ideologically.
P.S. DRILL, BABY, DRILL!
On a very quick skim, seems poorly written & activist-ish.
The same could be said about the hastily imposed moratorium.
Probably so. I haven’t read the report accompanying the moratorium. The Court is certainly very critical of it.
“The same could be said about the hastily imposed moratorium.”
Except the moratorium came down from a branch tasked with, you know making such decisions, where as a court is supposed to rule on the law. Perhaps there is legal issues with the moratorium, i have no idea having not read the ruling, but its specious to compare the actions of the judicial and executive branches. If the executive branch is going to be faulted simply for having made decisions then whats the point?
David, I disagree. AML is just asserting that the moratorium (and, presumably, the report accompanying it) is “poorly written” — that’s certainly possible — and “activist-ish.” It’s the latter point that I presume you’re objecting to, on the grounds that only judges, not executive branch officials and departments, can be “activist-ish.” But that’s not really true. The executive branch is charged with enforcing laws, not making them, except to the extent that Congress (which makes laws) has given executive-branch departments the authority to promulgate regulations consistent with existing statutes (authority that is probably given too freely these days to be consistent with the constitutional separation of powers, but that’s a separate debate). So, if the Interior Department’s report/moratorium goes beyond the rulemaking authority granted by Congress, and/or contradicts or skirts existing statutory law, it’s perfectly defensible to call it “activist-ish,” just as much as it’s defensible to say a judicial opinion that does the same thing is “activist-ish.” Now, whether AML is right on the merits is a separate issue, but he’s not automatically wrong just because he’s talking about something written by the executive branch rather than by the judicial branch.
This commentator is unable to divine or fathom a brain in that judges head…
Irony indeed … I hope empty insults such as dcl’s will not be the most likely response by liberals to Judge Feldman’s “activist-ish” ruling.
This commentator is unable to divine or fathom a brain in that judges head…
Really? For such a sweeping statement, surely you ought to be able to point to dozens of inane sentences in the above-linked document reflective of your assertion. Care to share your source material?
Let them eat Petrol.