Posted on 05/14/2005 12:44:57 PM PDT by wagglebee
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is citing a controversial new book sharply critical of the Supreme Court's judicial activism as the basis for new Republican initiatives on court reform.
"As a guide to his views on the subject, DeLay has been urging reporters to read "Men in Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America," reports the Washington Post. Written by former Reagan Justice Department official Mark Levin, "Men in Black" details the history of the high court going back to Marbury vs Madison - exposing more than a few members of the exclusive legal club as racists, anti-Semites and sexual predators.
The high regard with which most Americans currently regard the court is undeserved, argues Levin, invoking disastrous decisions like Plessy vs. Ferguson, which codified Jim Crow segregation as the law of the land, and Korematsu vs. United States, which placed the Supreme Court's stamp of approval on President Roosevelt's internment of the Japanese-Americans during World War II.
Rep. DeLay drew wide criticism from liberal pundits last month after he vowed that federal judges who sanctioned the starvation death of Terri Schiavo would be held accountable.
But House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, who is spearheading the GOP push for judicial reform, told the Post that any new measures would not be aimed at retribution.
"There are some judges that have deliberately decided to be in the face of the president and the Congress, and when they are criticized for that, they hide behind the issue of judicial independence," Sensenbrenner told the Post.
None of the three branches of government "should be given a blank check without oversight on their operations," he explained.
Among the ideas under consideration by the Wisconsin Republican, the Post said, was creation of an office of inspector general for the federal judiciary, like those that now serve as watchdogs of executive-branch agencies, to take complaints, prepare reports, and audit and investigate the administration of the courts.
He also wants to break up the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in 2002 that the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional because it included the words "under God."
"The Ninth is too big in so many ways," Sensenbrenner told a Stanford University audience this week. "The question is not if the Ninth will be split, but when."
Fat chance of that happening.
Ping!
Good for him---I haven't read the book yet, but I LOVE Mark Levin, as you can see from my tagline!!!
If Tom Delay uses his book for a reference source, two things will happen: he will be right and he will further infuriate the dems and libs!!!!! ya-hooty!
Yes, it would be nice to see Congress exercise their Constitutional authority. Disband the Ninth Circuit altogether instead of splitting it.
It's an incredible book! It is by far the most comprehensive explanation I've ever read about how out of control the federal judiciary is.
WooHoo!! Delay endores Mark's book! Very cool.
What's this about controversy however? It's Only controversial if someone is in denial of the Truth.
Push through the nuclear option. Split the 9th circuit. Fill every single court vacancy with conservaives before the 2008 elections. If we have the power, let's use it before a possible Hillary presidency.
Controversial means that the Democrats don't like it.
I've looked for it twice - apparently sold out.
I'll have to go check again. Maybe they have it in stock now.
I've heard that a lot of the Barnes & Nobles and Borders stores are intentionally depleting their stocks or "hiding" them. Amazon has it in stock.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895260506/qid=1116104829/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-9458651-3419300
Did you ask at the desk? I had to do that at our local B&N. It was never displayed on their "new non-fiction", and it was on the shelf in a category I'd never have thought to check. Can't remember what now -
What a great country this would be if there were 100 more DeLay's and Sessenbrenner's in the House!
I don't recall if I asked for this one - maybe not. The store I frequent usually puts this stuff in plain sight. After looking for Coulter's last book three weeks in a row, I did ask, only to be told they couldn't keep enough of them on the shelf. I suspect this may be the same, but I'm not as hot on reading this right away and haven't pursued the issue as aggressively.
It should be split like a hog at slaughter -- with the same result.
I agree.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
...Fat chance of that happening....
It doesn't fit in with their belief that when the Judge rules, We the People must bow down to him.
We do not.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1378491/posts
(from the article...)
In 1802, the Jeffersonians, faced with courts deliberately packed by the Federalists, passed the Judiciary Act of 1802, which abolished over half of all the sitting federal circuit judges. The act didn’t impeach them; it simply said their jobs didn’t exist. They wouldn’t be paid, so they shouldn’t bother to show up. The judges were deeply offended. They promptly went to court, and the remaining federal judges essentially said, if we overrule the Congress, they’re going to abolish our jobs.
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.