God and Judges: Justice in the Balance

God and Judges: Justice in the Balance
By David Brody
Congressional Correspondent

Because the acknowledgement of God lies at the heart of our nation's founding, this bill would make references to God in the public square off-limits for tinkering by judges.

CBN.com – WASHINGTON - There's a new bill in both the House and the Senate that would prevent judges from ruling on cases that involve the acknowledgement of God. In other words, judges would no longer be able to get involved in issues like the Ten Commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance or school prayer. But the bill is running into some stumbling blocks.

It seems nowadays it is one case after another, judges ruling against the acknowledgment of God in the public square. The Ten Commandments in Alabama - gone, moved out of sight. Or the Pledge of Allegiance, the words "under God" ruled unconstitutional. The list is long and it goes back decades, to when school prayer was removed from public school, and Bible reading was a 'no-no' as well.

But some in Congress say it is time to take a stand. Congressman Robert Aderholt (R-AL) said, "To say that this country was not founded on the principles that acknowledge God is to completely deny history, and I think what's important to remember in all of this legislation that we're looking at."

Aderholt says look up article 3, section two of the Constitution. It says in black and white that Congress has the power to regulate the power of the judicial branch: "The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make."

Though the bill's backers say this all makes sense, it is on hold in the House Judiciary Committee. Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) isn't inclined to move it. His office tells me that since this is somewhat of a new issue on the agenda, so it needs more time to be examined.

Plus, it has just a few congressmen sponsoring it, so they don't see a need to move it at this point. Aderholt said "Anytime that you deal with the article 3 and restricting the federal courts, then I think any member of Congress will think say this must be an issue that we have to look at very slowly."

If this bill ever becomes a reality, its supporters say our country would be far better off. Because, they say, the acknowledgement of God lies at the heart of our nation's founding, and this bill would make references to God in the public square off-limits for tinkering by judges. For example, those nativity scenes that the ACLU wants to get rid of would be safe, because a judge couldn't rule on a case like that. Same thing goes for Ten Commandment displays. They are safe with this bill, as well as the motto, "In God we trust."

But for all of that to become a reality, the bill's supporters say, the public must engage. Rule 101 in Congress is that Congress doesn't lead, it responds. Former Congressman Bill Dannemeyer says that is what it will take to get the bill moving.

Dannemeyer said, "When the people in America contact their members of Congress to do something, members pay attention. And that's what we need to do in order to get the attention of Jim Sensenbrenner - he's a good friend of mine, you know - to set these bills for hearings."

Aderholt hopes Sensenbrenner will understand the need to move this bill. Aderholt said, "He has been talked to about this legislation. I hope to be meeting with him in the near future, about when we could get through committee, but Tom Delay [R-TX] is the majority leader, and he is certainly open to legislation like this."

Backers of the bill say don't expect to see coverage of this issue on the front page of liberal newspapers like The New York Times and The Washington Post. This will have to be a grassroots effort.

"Let's face it," Dannemeyer said. "The media in this country is controlled by people on the Left. They have chosen to ignore this, and they'll continue to ignore it until the people of this country tell their members of Congress to get this job done."

Time is running out, though. With a presidential election year looming in November, the Congress likes to get bills moved earlier, rather than later. And the bill's backers say this really is a crisis that needs immediate action.

H. R. 3799
To limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 11, 2004

Mr. ADERHOLT (for himself and Mr. PENCE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL
To limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Constitution Restoration Act of 2004'.

TITLE I—JURISDICTION

SEC. 101. APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

(a) IN GENERAL-
(1) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable

`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

(2) TABLE OF SECTIONS- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`1260. Matters not reviewable.'.
(b) APPLICABILITY- Section 1260 of title 28, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall not apply to an action pending on the date of enactment of this Act, except to the extent that a party or claim is sought to be included in that action after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 102. LIMITATIONS ON JURISDICTION.

(a) IN GENERAL-
(1) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28- Chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end of the following:

`Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the district court shall not have jurisdiction of a matter if the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review that matter by reason of section 1260 of this title.'.

(2) TABLE OF SECTIONS- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`1370. Matters that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review.'.

(b) APPLICABILITY- Section 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall not apply to an action pending on the date of enactment of this Act, except to the extent that a party or claim is sought to be included in that action after the date of enactment of this Act.

TITLE II—INTERPRETATION

SEC. 201. INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.,

In interpreting and applying the Constitution of the United States, a court of the United States may not rely upon any constitution, law, administrative rule, Executive order, directive, policy, judicial decision, or any other action of any foreign state or international organization or agency, other than the constitutional law and English common law.

TITLE III—ENFORCEMENT

.SEC. 301. EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL CASES NOT BINDING ON STATES.

Any decision of a Federal court which has been made prior to or after the effective date of this Act, to the extent that the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction under section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by this Act, is not binding precedent on any State court.

SEC. 302. IMPEACHMENT, CONVICTION, AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES FOR CERTAIN EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL ACTIVITIES.

To the extent that a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States or any judge of any Federal court engages in any activity that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court of that justice or judge, as the case may be, by reason of section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by this Act, engaging in that activity shall be deemed to constitute the commission of--

(1) an offense for which the judge may be removed upon impeachment and conviction; and
(2) a breach of the standard of good behavior required by article III, section 1 of the Constitution.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.