Edwin Meese Quotes

It is better that the law should be certain than that every judge should speculate upon improvements in it.

My job is to follow the law, not to make up the law that has been promulgated by the people or the people's representatives.

The purpose of a written constitution is to bind up the several branches of government by certain laws, which, when they transgress, their acts shall become nullities; to render unnecessary an appeal to the people, or in other words a rebellion, on every infraction of their rights, on the peril that their acquiescence shall be construed into an intention to surrender those rights.

… courts do not substitute their social and economic beliefs for the judgment of legislative bodies, who are elected to pass laws

Constitutional interpretation ... is a process of holding an actual government within certain bounds.

There is a problem. We do have this little thing called the Constitution.

If the president is allowed to govern by executive action, then the rule of law greatly suffers.

As a former federal judge, I am cognizant of the legal issues. As governor, I am forced to deal with their ramifications.

I respect, too, the fact that in our legal order it is for Congress and not the courts to write new laws. It is the role of judges to apply, not alter, the work of the people's representatives.

We are a constitutional democracy. We must deal with things properly within the framework of the law and then the constitution.

In a nation based on the 'consent of the governed,' judges are supposed to apply the laws the people have assented to.

In the legislative branch, you make the laws... and our role as judges is to interpret the law, not to inject our own policy preferences. So our task is to give an honest construction to what laws are passed by the Legislature.

Judges should always behave judicially by adjudicating, never politically by legislating. I leave policy to policymakers. They're preeminent, but they're not omnipotent. In other words, lawmakers decide if laws pass, but judges decide if laws pass muster.

Laws, especially those of a constitutional nature like the Basic Law, which have been formulated through reasonable legislative processes, should never be freely interpreted or lightly abandoned.

Judges should decide legal disputes. Judges should not make law.

Courts should interpret the law but leave elected lawmakers to create it.

Stability in law - particularly constitutional law - is critically important; the Supreme Court would do well to remember that.

Judicial review has developed since the 1970s as a way for individuals to challenge decisions taken by the State.

In England Parliament is above the law. In America the law is above Congress.

Under our constitutional system, the executive executes the laws that Congress has passed. It should not be executing laws that Congress has rejected.

The position the Government finds itself in is not one of constructing a law, but of carrying out a decision given by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

My touchstone for every question is the Constitution.

The constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances.

All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people out there with court of appeals experience, because court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know, I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law, I know. I know.

Constitutions should consist only of general provisions; the reason is that they must necessarily be permanent, and that they cannot calculate for the possible change of things.