Activism? An admission.

Hello all,

I thought you all might be interested to know that on Monday 4/17/06 in my Labor Law class, Prof. McLaughlin freely (and loudly) admitted that Justice Brennan engaged in BLATENT JUDICIAL ACTIVISM in the opinion he wrote for the Tree Fruits case we studied. If anyone would like to look at the case, the cite is 377 U.S. 58.

In a nutshell, Brennan's analysis completely bypassed the "plain meaning" of the NLRA, skipped directly to the legislative findings, which he ignored and interpreted extremely narrow to the point of absurdity and disrespect to the men and women who actually made the law, and (suprise suprise) reached a pro-labor result. He did it in order to save a clearly unconstitutional statute. In the process, he rendered impotent the only clear and black letter section of the Landrum-Griffin amendements to the NLRA, which happened to be an anti-picketing protection for employers and management.

I've contacted the Vatican to inquire if it's an "eligible miracle" when a liberal professor admits that a liberal SCOTUS judge is an activist. The canonization of Saint Randolph of White Plains may well have begun. OK, that's a joke. I do commend and applaud Prof. McLaughlin for admitting that Brennan was a judicial activist. I hope he hasn't put his tenure in jeopardy. (That's a joke, too.)