In a case that is sparking controversy among conservative and
pro-family groups, the notoriously liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled this week that parents do not have exclusive rights over their
children when it comes to providing sexual education. This ruling is
one of many, including the infamous "Under God" decision, which has
established this court as the poster child for judicial activism.
In a case that is sparking controversy among conservative and
pro-family groups, the notoriously liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled this week that parents do not have exclusive rights over their
children when it comes to providing sexual education. This ruling is
one of many, including the infamous “Under God” decision, which has
established this court as the poster child for judicial activism.
As reported in Appeals Court Declares Parenthood Unconstitutional, Group
Says, the 9th Circuit dismissed a case brought by California
parents who were “outraged over a sex survey given to public school
students in the first, third and fifth grades.”
According to the report:
The parents argued that they — not the public schools
— have the sole right “to control the upbringing of their children by
introducing them to matters of and relating to sex.”
However, on Wednesday, the three-judge panel of the 9th
Circuit said:
There is no fundamental right of parents to be the
exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their
children. … Parents have no due process or privacy right to override
the determinations of public schools as to the information to which
their children will be exposed while enrolled as students.
Judicial activism is one of the most diabolical aspects
of our current government, and it is one which the founding fathers
certainly did not anticipate. Whether the activism is by liberals or
conservatives, the right approach for a judge is to examine the law as
written, the Constitution (state or federal), and rule according to
what’s written. If times have changed, and society has evolved, then
there are mechanisms in place such as enacting new laws or amending a
constitution to cover those situations.
As Rachel Alexander pointed out yesterday, current
Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel Alito has issued rulings over his
career that might leave some wondering where he stands on abortion.
Although these cases will certainly be reviewed in detail, the key
point to keep in mind is that America does not want a judicial
activist. Rulings should be based on the law and the Constitution and
not the personal beliefs of a judge.
