|
medpundit |
||
 |
 |
|
Monday, September 20, 2004Our legislature has passed tort reform measures, but this isn't the first time they've been passed. In the past, the reform measures were cut down by the Ohio Supreme Court, which interpreted them as unconstitutional. The reason? The court was laden with judges who believe strongly in judicial activism - liberally interpreting the law so that it can be used an instrument of social reform. They believed in litigation, not legislation. Right now, we have a State Supreme Court that is tilted toward judicial restraint, but only by a margin of 4 to 3. That could change on Nov. 2, when we vote for four of the seven seats on the Ohio Supreme Court. This election could easily swing the court in favor of judicial activism by 5 to 2, which would mean our legislature's efforts at tort reform will have been, once again, for nought. I urge my Ohio readers to consider the choices for Supreme Court Justice carefully before voting. Justice Thomas Moyer, Justice Terrence O'Donnell, and Judge Judith Lanzinger are all candidates known to favor judicial restraint over activism. A non-partisan guide to the judicial race can be found here. A more detailed, although admittedly medically partisan, explanation of the importance of the race can be found here. Remember, your vote does count. You can stop the exodus of doctors from Ohio. posted by Sydney on 9/20/2004 08:05:00 AM 0 comments 0 Comments: |
|
