of course i think they have been too liberal. maybe not liberal, but leaning toward the totalitarian philosophies of what we see today as liberalism. i think that the idea of appointing activist judges to scotus is a sure way to change the very landscape of this nation's ethos and damage the individualism that has brought us so far. radicalism is important in the shaping of our society, but the court's duty is to interpret the constitution and to see where legislation fits into that scheme. their duty is not to change the meaning the document to fit within a given agenda nor is it to play the political games of social engineering. scotus should be the most conservative branch of our government, the balance that keeps popularity driven politicians from bowing to the pressures of the mob and steadies us on this country's chosen path. those justices are the individual's last line of defense against the control of the majority.
it seems that the major flaw is that the court is not active enough in the early stages of legislation, only engaging in the debate after the damage has already been done. every decision made by the other branches of government should be examined by the court for the sort of abuses that lead to authoritarian control over the individual.
