To the Editor:
Regarding the article, "Appeals judge urges liberal interpretations of the Constitution" (The Dartmouth, April 27), reporting Judge Noonan's Thurlow Weed Lecture, the article refers to Judge Noonan as a member of "the activist, San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals." The term "activist" is much en vogue today, and is not as a term of endearment. Concerning judicial nominees, perhaps the only thing Republicans and Democrats agree upon is that activist judges are bad news.
The term "activist," as applied to judges, is neutrally defined as manifesting a willingness ignore the dictates of the law in order to reach the outcome he or she thinks best or most just. That is to say an activist will decide cases based on his or her normative sense of justice, rather than the law. I have not read enough of Judge Noonan's writings to ascertain whether he is fairly described as "activist." I am quite sure, however, that it is inaccurate to foist that label upon the entire Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. There are presently 47 judges sitting on the Ninth Circuit. They can't all be activists, can they?
