Define Your Terms

I am so damn sick of pundits referring to the five injustices on our current Supreme Court as judicial activists. Merely overturning a precedent is not judicial activism.  As I pointed out in a previous post, “judicial activism" is a pejorative term reactionaries use to describe the practice of overturning unjust but well established precedents; which makes "judicial activist" a badge of honor that must be earned!  Laws that protect the right to vote and make it easier to exercise that right are not unjust. Laws that allow legal remedies for injuries caused by medical malpractice or the negligence of companies are not unjust. Laws that protect us from the risky and bad behavior of financial institutions are not unjust. Laws that protect the right of employees to collectively bargain with employers are not unjust. Laws that prevent the oligopoly from buying politicians and elections are not unjust. Calling the five supreme injustices “judicial activists” is therefore a bastardization of a term used to describe the very justices who have done the most to make our laws and our society fairer and more equitable.

What is obviously called for now is a term to describe the injustices who are casting us back into a time before either of the Roosevelts, when there were no labor unions and the robber barons pretty much did as they pleased no matter how harmful that was. The definition of a reactionary is: someone who is resistant or opposed to a force, influence or movement; “especially: [a] tendency toward a former and usually outmoded political or social order or policy.” I therefore propose that we describe overturning just and well established precedents as acts of “judicial re-activism,” and that we describe the five injustices who are overturning those just precedents as “judicial reactionaries.” 

Given the fact that Messrs. Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy have made this the most politicized and retrogressive court ever, calling them "Judicial Reactionaries" seems almost too polite to me.  I mean, how do you describe men who have and are causing so much damage to our country and the reputation of its highest court without becoming profane?  If you have a better suggestion than "judicial reactionaries" or "supreme injustices," please let me know.