The two key words in assessing the President’s nominee to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy are stare decisis. This ancient Latin phrase, which means let the decision stand, represents a conservative approach to judging: that precedent imposes constraints on judicial innovation. Put another way, that judicial innovation should be balanced against the need to maintain stability in our legal system. But like most legal terms, stare decisis can easily be manipulated to benefit both conservatives and liberals. Traditionally it has been conservatives who have embraced stare decisis, allowing the dead hand of the law to constrain the living constitution. But liberals, too, embrace the concept when they seek to preserve old precedents that are important to them.
Today, liberals want to use stare decisis to preserve Roe v. Wade, gay marriage and other iconic liberal decisions of the past. Many conservatives would like to see these decision overruled. When the President interviews potential nominees, and when the Senate advises and consents on the nomination, these nominees will be questioned about their positions on important cases of the past and their likely votes in the future. They will decline to be specific claiming the need for judicial independence. But one area of legitimate inquiry will be their institutional views regarding stare decisis.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu paid tribute to the historic alliance between Israel and the US at a July 4 reception at the newly-opened American Embassy in Jerusalem.
“We’re grateful for America’s independence,” Netanyahu declared. “We’re grateful for America’s strength. We’re grateful for America’s alliance with Israel.”
Netanyahu also singled out US President Donald Trump for special praise. “You remember that Iran nuclear deal? Remember that?” the Prime Minister asked. “President Trump decided to leave this bad deal and he did the greatest thing for the security of the world and for the security of Israel.”
Commenting on the arrest of an alleged Iranian terror network operating in France by French, Belgian and German authorities, Netanyahu remarked: “This Iranian terror plot was planned on the soil of Europe on the same week that the European leaders are supposed to meet the President of Iran about circumventing the sanctions on Iran.”
Polish lawmaker Dominik Tarczyński has stuck to his guns following a frank interview on the migrant crisis with Cathy Newman, insisting his government will not take a single illegal migrant because that is what his party promised before the elections.
The Channel 4 presenter, who became infamous online following her viral interview with Canadian scholar Jordan Peterson, had demanded to know how many “refugees” Poland had taken, to which the Law and Justice Party (PiS) politician replied: “Zero.”
“And you’re proud of that?” Newman demanded.
“If you are asking me about Muslim illegal immigrants, none, not even one, will come to Poland,” Tarczyński repeated.
“We took over two million Ukrainians — who are working, who are peaceful — in Poland. We will not receive even one Muslim, because this is what we promised… this is why our government was elected; this is why Poland is so safe, this is why we have not had even one terror attack,” he said.
“We can be called ‘populists’, ‘nationalists’, ‘racists’, I don’t care — I care about my family, and about my country.”