Borking Sotomayor

Some astute observations from Prof. Edward Fallone of Marquette University Law School:

In the Manichean world view of strict constructionists, all of those who do not share their views are "judicial activists." Therefore, that label has been affixed to Judge Sotomayor by her critics despite the fact that her record demonstrates a conscientious effort to decide cases in accord with established precedent. This characteristic, once considered a hallmark of judicial restraint, is apparently a defect when the precedent is not of one’s liking. The key difference between Judge Bork and Judge Sotomayor is that the former challenged the status quo while the latter seeks to perpetuate it.

Bork Reconsidered, Part I

In Bork's defense, it's also true that judges swear to support and defend the Constitution, not the Court's precedents.

And here's an entertaining review of Bork's collection of irascible reminiscences, Slouching Towards Gomorrah. Prof. Bork has a self-effacing habit of decorating his books with Biblical innuendo. His latest is A Time To Speak, the title borrowed from Ecclesiastes 3:7, which tradition holds was dictated to King Solomon by God Hisself.

Many of the essays within purport to affirm a similar pretense.