Southern Appeal chimes in on the proper role of a judge.

To this post over at Southern Appeal, I can only say "Amen!"

My favorite part:

In sum, an outcome-based-judicial philosophy is antithetical to the rule of law and should not be embraced by conservatives, no matter what results it might produce. If Americans don't care for certain aspects of the federal Constitution, then we are always free to change them vis-a-vis the prescribed amendment process outlined in our founding document. But for the continued well being of our constitutional republic, such changes must not be effectuated by judicial fiat.

I would expand this admonition beyond just "conservatives" to everyone. Starting with a desired outcome and then trying to find an analysis that will get you there is what gets judges accused of "activism", whether they are liberal activists or conservative activists (there are certainly "activists" on both ends of the spectrum) and why some judicial opinions are praised for the result but condemned for the shaky legal foundation on which they were constructed.