...are absolutely useless if activist judges can come in and overturn them without consent of legislators or the people.

------------------------------------------------
“...the term “democrat” originated as an epithet and referred to ‘one who panders to the crude and mindless whims of the masses.’”

Are you inferring that Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford or Brown v. Board of Education should not have been tested in the US Supreme Court?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

The decision by 4 of the 7 Georgia Supreme Court justices to sack and vandalize the legislature demonstrates why America is doomed by an ignorant, special interest crazed populace. In the Genarlow Wilson case, our own Supreme Court disregarded the separation of powers doctrine (or at least 4 of them did). Genarlow Wilson was sentenced as a felon for a sex crime. The legislature later made that crime a misdemeanor but after hearing Leah Sears' public comments specifically said that it did not apply to anyone already sentenced. 4 of the Georgia Justices in essence said "Well, we are going to ignore that part and do it anyway." They did so because Americans no longer want the rule of law. They want the rule of special interest. Americans want to win the lottery, get their special treatment and to constantly cry out special interest or race (“Maybe because he’s black?"). Sorry, Hutch, one of the 3 dissenting justices who voted for the rule of law and against Genarlow was BLACK. Thank you to Beaver for starting this sad but important conversation.

We have departed from the Rule of Law to the Rule of David’s Mom or Hutch or whoever. Did any of you read the opinion? It is in the newspaper and you can click on it below. Just read page 33. Did you read why 3 of the 7 justices said “no”? I didn’t think so. This is exactly why most Americans cannot name their Congressman and Senators nor recite the lyrics to our national anthem. But Americans are asleep, happy with subsidies and pork, and oblivious to the erosion of our constitutional republic. When a kid gets in trouble in school, most parents now don't ask why--- instead they bring a lawyer to the meeting with the principal. This is why Americans tolerate our spending billions on bridges to nowhere. Our constitutional republic used to mean that the legislature wrote the laws, the executive enforced them and the courts interpret them. Not with a Leah Sears, who is an aggressive, enlightened social engineer. This is the same Justice who reportedly was welcomed with open arms by the local Fayette County Republican Party.
Read the Court’s decision and think before you repeat what you see on television.
CLICK HERE FOR GEORGIA SUPREME COURT DECISION: GENARLOW WILSON.
Click on the link for Supreme Court; top of page “Opinions”; 2007; first Wilson case. Three of the 7 justices said NO, and one them was BLACK. Look at the dissenting opinion at page 33.

The biggest problem with the case and with Leah Sears’ social engineering from the bench has nothing to do with Mr. Wilson or even any differing views on oral sex. It has to do with the invasion of the separation of powers. When the Georgia General Assembly rewrote the law they said that even though they were reducing the penalty for this crime that this would NOT affect anyone already sentenced or anyone under pending cases. Here is what the legislature said:

“The provisions of this Act shall not affect or abate the status as a crime of any such act or omission which occurred prior to the effective date of the Act repealing, repealing and reenacting, or amending such law, nor shall the prosecution of such crime be abated as a result of such repeal, repeal and reenactment, or amendment."
The Legislature expressly limited this to new cases.

What was the proper response for supporters of Genarlow? Get the legislature to change the law again.

Leah Sears has proven once again that if you have enough money or enough power that the law will be disregarded.

. . .not the rule of politicians; etc. Thank heavens we have a justice system to correct a bad law. This has nothing to do with race. Thank you for pointing out that not all 'blacks' agree on every issue. The opinions on this board are not always about race. The reason 4 justices agreed - was that the punishment did not match the crime. . .regardless of the color or wealth of the accused. Out of over 1000 inmates - this ruling MAY affect 58. There will not be 'sex offenders' leaving the jails in mass. We can all read - and with comprehension. . .and in a free society, form our own perception of what is read. Leah Sears and three of her colleagues have agreed. The issue is settled.

Even where there is substantial philosophical disagreement, all is well when the disputants can sit down together over a cold India Pale Ale.

I'm still of the opinion that some of the best is brewed right here in Atlanta--those yellow Sweetwater cartons. But there are many others. Have you been to Max Lager's downtown (on Peachtree across from the SunTrust building)? Their pale ale is actually an IPA and it may well be the gold standard of west coast style IPAs. Then there is Dogfish Head's "90 Minute"-basically a double IPA, which packs a wallop both in hoppiness and alcohol content. Hercules DOuble IPA is similar, with perhaps a 9% alc. content.

Standing in the beer aisle of, say, Whole Foods or one of the many great groceries in Asheville it is sometimes hard to choose, there are so many good ones.

I will never understand the attraction to Bud or Bud Light. Monty Python
compared such American beers to "making love in a canoe."

Yes, forgetting all about Genarlow, we may assess the process that freed him. You argue convincingly that this amounted to a breakdown in the rule of law.

I take it that all of the following are consistent together:

(1) Sex between minors is immoral.
(2) Consensual sex between minors ought (morally) not to be felonious. (And the sex should be illegal at all only because it involves minors.)
(3) The law responsible for Genarlow's conviction/sentence was a bad law in need of change.
(4) The legislative change ought to have allowed for the possibility of retroactive decisions but did not.
(5) It was not the place of the courts to correct the perceived lapse expressed at (4).

So it is the task of the courts to interpret existing laws, and this court overreached by effectively rendering the standing law null and void.

I guess you've got me here. This seems right.

You suggest that the correct route would be a new legislative change. Of course, this allows for the possibility that injustices are perpetuated during a plotentially slow process.

Is this another one? Might one argue that the law on the state's books is unconstitutional? Then the case would be taken out of the state courts and into higher federal courts. Suppose that one argues successfully that the law is, in fact, unconstitutional. Then if, say, the U.S. Supreme Court makes a ruling resulting in a Genarlow's freedom, this is consistent with their role. Then it is a matter of constitutional interpretation. Right?

We can talk abstractly about "rule of law", but the law is supposed to reflect justice and proportionality between a crime and the resulting punishment. If every seventeen year old boy who had sex with a fifteen year old girl got 10 years in jail, our jails would be overflowing with teenage boys, and I would have been one of them 30 years ago. If you heard Genarlow's statement upon release, it's obvious that he has learned his lesson. Justice was served by letting him go.

I usually agree with you, my dear friend Muddle, particularly on IPA. But on this issue I do not.

When you stated that "the old law was clearly immoral, should never have been in place, and is happily abolished.", you provoke the question----- whose standards? Do you reference a normative standard such as Hans Kelsen? Or an immutable standard such as Aquinas?

Aha...You see the trap.

We are a country ruled by law and not ruled by men. Let's forget about Genarlow for a moment. When the legislature repealed this law making Genarlow's felony into a misdemeanor they specifically enacted law to PREVENT any previous sentence (like Genarlow) from being modified into a misdemeanor. The ruling by the Georgia Supreme Court (4-3 split vote) invades the legislature. It destroys the rule of law. Imagine that---- raw judicial activism in the Deep South.

Alas, your view of the "morality" is tantalizingly reminiscent of the French Revolution. Indeed, one can argue quite convincingly that the laws permitting slavery and abortion are inherently "immoral".

The real damage here is to our rule of law as we slide closer and closer to being indistinguisable from countries like France and Germany.

I still love your discourse so please do not take offense.

It wasn't the job of the Georgia Supreme Court to overturn this law, but that is exactly what they did. They have just opened up a big ol' can o' worms and could have a rippling affect across the country.

----------------------------------------
“...the term “democrat” originated as an epithet and referred to ‘one who panders to the crude and mindless whims of the masses.’”

you've never commented on any of the molesters arrested here in Fayette why comment on this one? Maybe because he's black?

I yam what I yam...Popeye

I was at Town Hall today, reading the Fayette County Sex Offenders list. Tyrone has 4 but one was missing. A Mexican at 340 Palmetto Road, An Arab at 388 Palmetto Road, and a White at an address I don't recall. Mising from the list was Wm. Bill Fowler, Valerie Fowler's husband formerly of 245 Julie Road, currently residing in Federal Prison.

DELETED.