The Blue State Court

The Wall Street Journal ^ | March 2, 2005 | WSJ

[Les_Miserables]

I do subscribe to Rumsfield's philosophy of "if you can't fix it make it worse" in the obvious hope that a worse problem would demand a fix. However, SCOTUS is already in the worse category. I couldn't support a course further down the path of amoral fixation they are currently on. If POTUS refused to enforce a ruling that would temporarily fore stay the problem but a new less favorable president could be elected and we might find the army in our bedrooms. Remember Bubba and Blondie?

Now Congress is another matter. Congress has the power to gradually strangle SCOTUS until they get the message. To give a draconian example: Let's suppose POTUS provides temporary relief from a particularly onerous decision through lack of enforcement. Congress can really put the screws to SCOTUS by de-funding all but their salaries (everything...all..paper, pencils, telephone, everything period) Second step could be to gradually suspend US District and Circuit Courts (or at least the most egregious ones like the 9th circuit) all of which serve at the pleasure of Congress. Since SCOTUS has only appeal authority on most matters not involving disputes between the states, there would be no path to take ACLU issues to SCOTUS.

Plenty of disruption? You bet but it would work in a heartbeat. It would require many members of congress to grow eggs however and that is our (we the people) job.

[Les_Miserables]

Bingo! and my definition of violation of the Good Behavior requirement to continue in office is basing any decision in any way on any rational except the INTENT of the US Constitution as currently amended. Based on public pronouncement and written opinions a Senate with cahones could start impeachment proceedings tomorrow with Bader-Ginsbeg, followed in swift order by Souter, Kennedy, Stevens and even O'Conner who by the way has Circuit responsibility for the wonderful 9th Circuit.

[Aetius]

I agree that Congress would be a better instrument for a long-term and possibly permanent chastisement of the Courts. Clearly an honorable and justified stand taken by President Bush could simply be undone by a future President.

Of course the same could occur with a change of power in Congress, but obviously undoing the things you suggest would be much harder than a reverse from the Executive branch.

Ideally though, the President and Congress would work together in such a bold and necessary move.