Bork is more interested in form than in substance as he plays the game of academic sophistry. He refuses to recognize that in applying his test of "intention as the guide," he is using a subjective test which is simply a disguised version of the very judicial activism he condemns.
He is an ideologue who has set up his own nomenclature to arrive at what are, in his case, entirely predictable and virtually predetermined decisions. He thus demonstrates that he does not have the judicial temperament which should be a prerequisite for sitting on the Supreme Court.
In short, he does not understand the mandate engraved on the facade of the Supreme Court building--"Equal Justice Before Law"--which, after all, is at the heart of our Constitution.
S. DELL SCOTT