Judicial Rage
A Moot Court Response to the Hawaii Supreme Court’s "Independent" Outburst Jonathan Turley’s recent criticism of the Hawaii Supreme Court hits on a tension that has long simmered beneath the surface of American jurisprudence: the collision between judicial restraint and judicial activism. In his July 18, 2026, blog post, “No Mahalo for You,” J. Turley dissects the Hawaii Supreme Court’s unanimous but rhetorically unhinged decision in State v. Granillo, where Justice Todd W. Eddins labeled the U.S. Supreme Court “de facto racists” and “hubristic originalists.” As a former participant in the comment sections of his blog, Res Ipsa Loquitur, I attempted to engage in the kind of moot court debate he so skillfully stages. But as the discourse went off the rails, the comment forum felt less like a seminar and more like a shouting match. Therefore, I am moving my reading of his arguments to this space to offer a more structured, original restatement of the argument, treating the rece...