The Government's suggestion that carving out a RFRA exemption from the drug laws would represent judicial activism is entirely backward. This case does not involve courts ordering an exception to an Act of Congress based on general language in the Constitution. It involves an exception to the Controlled Substances Act based on another Act of Congress that expressly calls for exceptions to federal statutes. The case involves two federal statutes, and each must be taken seriously. It is not judicial activism to read the two together and rely on one to create an exception to theother. Judicial activism would be refusing to enforce RFRA.Chief Justice Roberts and all 8 of his merry justices bought it. And of course, Mirror of Justice has it covered.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Hoasca tea & Judicial Activism
Very nicely put by the amici to the hoasca tea-religion case that SCOTUS just ruled on yesterday: