Try "The Government Can Take Your House" thread for the most recent example. I didn't get that Bork was basing his thesis on a criticism of Sandra Day O'Connor at all.....I think you should reread the piece.
No, I said his specific examples were all about her decisions. There were no other specific case examples that I read. Perhaps I will re-read and see if there are some I missed.
I'm on record as completely disagreeing with the decision being discussed in the thread you mention. What I'm unable to determine, however, is when a bad decision, or one that I personally disagree with, becomes a concerted effort to circumvent legislative bodies.
I think he cited some excellent examples to back up his thesis. He mentioned the vacancy left by O'Connor as significant because while he seems to like her a lot, he notes his reasons for not wanting her replaced with another like her; namely that while she does get it right some of the time, she does not seem to grasp what judicial activism is or how dangerous it is. And he was clear that he wasn't pointing that finger at only her.
Yes, he said all those things. But judicial activism is still a very abstract concept and hasn't come any closer to being defined, neither in his article or anywhere in this thread. It's that definition I'm looking for.