A lesson in judicial activism

For those who wonder about the meaning of "judicial activism" and "legislating from the bench," The U.S. Supreme Court this week served up a supreme example defining those terms.

Or more precisely, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did.

Ginsburg took the rare step of reading from the bench a minority opinion on a case in which a woman claimed sexual discrimination during a long career with Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

"In our view, the court does not comprehend, or is indifferent to, the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination," Ginsburg said.

The plaintiff may have indeed been discriminated against, but the five-justice majority took the position that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 specifies a 180-day period in which discrimination claims must be filed. And the plaintiff did not meet that requirement in pursuing her legal claim.

"We apply the statute as written, and this means that any unlawful employment practice, including those involving compensation, must be presented … within the period prescribed by the statute," Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority.

Had the Ginsburg opinion prevailed, the Supreme Court would have rewritten a clearly stated provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

That's called legislating from the bench. Legislating is something Congress is supposed to do, not the court.

So Ginsburg went on to make a remarkable call on Congress "to correct this Court's parsimonious reading of Title VII."

What business does Ginsburg have inviting or asking or urging Congress to legislate in a certain way? Her statements amount to activism in the Supreme Court, and an indulgence in political views dating back to her pre-court days as a feminist legal activist. And with one more vote, Ginsburg and her allies would have succeeded in rewriting the law.

Besides, what Ginsburg "does not comprehend, or is indifferent to," is the fact that lower pay does not instantly qualify as discrimination. The woman who sued may have just been an inferior employee who was lucky to keep her job at all and who received lesser raises over her 19 year career because of lesser work.

To automatically assume otherwise means that no woman can ever be judged the worst at anything without claiming to be the victim of discrimination. Surely, that is not the goal of our attempts to be color blind and gender neutral.

A newlywed couple can add heroism to their list of attributes for having the wherewithal to flag down the driver of the Whitefish tennis team's charter bus near Laurel before it became fully engulfed in fire on Saturday.

Using markers and sign boards they had used to decorate their car, they got the driver's attention with a sign that simply stated: "You are on fire."

Thankfully, the students and coaches exited the bus in the nick of time. Whitefish Superintendent of Schools Jerry House summed it up best when he said: "Most importantly, nobody was hurt and the kids are safe."

The fire was an eerie reminder of the Whitefish school bus fire of 1984 when all passengers weren't able to get out in time. Nine died and 17 were injured in that tragedy. That accident, House said, continues to reinforce the ultimate goal of keeping students safe on out-of-town trips.