In our recent and current Supreme Court appointment processes, I have observed and heard on several occasions the idea expressed (by minority and women's rights advocates), that rights ought to be continually expanded (unendingly, I guess) as an ongoing imperative of the Court.
The idea is only expressed in the most generic terms, and only by these groups.
I have been baffled as to what is meant by these groups, and how one (in the personage(s) of the Supreme Court) goes about "expanding" rights.
Whence do new rights arise?
By what process could a felt "need" for a new right be determined?