In the world of the liberal media, there is no distinction between the judicial and legislative branches. If the MSM deems a particular outcome desirable, courts should so rule - the law and constitution in question be damned.
A good illustration of the mindset is on display in today's editorial in the Los Angeles Times, Setback for Marriage Justice , condemning recent state court decisions in New York and Georgia that declined to find a right to gay marriage.
Naturally the LAT expresses the fond hope that California's high court will adopt "a more enlightened view" when it takes up the issue in an upcoming case. The Times expresses its "revulsion" for what it deems "anti-gay marriage hysteria."
But what is absent from the editorial is any serious attempt to demonstrate what, if anything, was flawed as a matter of law in the respective courts' rulings. For the MSM, laws and constitutions are impediments to 'justice,' defined as the particular liberal agenda item of the day.
The final and most telling clue that the Times sees courts as no different from legislatures came when the editorial pouted about "a high court seemingly disinclined to address marriage." Disinclined to address? Courts are there to decide the cases before them. Legislatures and executives "address" issues. But for the MSM, when it comes to advancing the liberal agenda, who cares about shredding the constitutional separation of powers?