Should Judges have Absolute Power?

Law courts determine facts based on evidence and testimony.  Did driver A go through the red light and hit driver B?  But when judges determine facts in a case based on the Constitution, they may be using  "facts" in a specific case to change social policy.  Take the recent supreme Court of Canada decision that laws prohibiting brothels and solicitation by prostitutes are invalid because they force prostitutes into dangerous situations.  Therefore, prostitutes have the constitutional right to solicit business in public.  But think of the consequences.  Open brothels in your neighbourhood highlighted by neon lights, radio and television ads, Friday night specials, discounts for groups, the list is endless.

Issues like this raise the age-old question:  when do minority rights trump majority rights?  Prior to the mid 20th century, for example, employers had the right to reject applicants for any reason - race, gender, religion, sexual orientation etc.  But over a period of time, public debate, Human Rights Commissions, advocacy groups and political parties came to the same conclusion - employees should be chosen on merit (with a few exceptions).  This social policy is now regarded as "normal",  "just" and "right".  Judges should never be allowed dictatorial power to set social policy.  Beware of unintended consequences.