Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Justice Kennedy: Lawyers Must Defend Judiciary From Attacks
AP ^ | 6/24/05 | Mike Schneider

Posted on 06/24/2005 1:13:50 PM PDT by Crackingham

Lawyers should speak up and explain the judicial process when judges come under attack, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy told members of the Florida Bar on Friday.

"When judges are attacked unfairly, it's proper for the bar over the course of time, in a professional and elegant way, to explain to the public the meaning of the rule of the law," Kennedy told several hundred lawyers attending the Florida Bar's annual meeting.

In the past year, the judiciary has come under attack from U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who openly criticized the federal courts when they refused to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. Delay pointed to Kennedy as an example of Republican members of the Supreme Court who were activist and isolated. Other conservative critics have accused the courts of housing "activist judges," and in Chicago, the husband and mother of a federal judge were found murdered in her home. There's nothing wrong with criticizing cases, Kennedy said.

"We want a debate on what the law does and what it means," he added. "Judges aren't immune from criticism and neither are their decisions."

What is worrisome is when the criticism isn't just focused on a decision but at the judiciary, and increasingly, individual judges, he said. Lawyers can act as an intermediary between the decisions made by judges and the larger society by explaining, he added.

"When the judiciary is under attack, the bar disengaged, the public indifferent and critics scornful, then this idea of judicial independence might be under a real threat," Kennedy said.

Some critics believe that the idea of judicial independence gives judges the ability to rule however they want to, but the opposite is true, Kennedy said.

"Judicial independence is so that a judge can do what he has to do or what she must do," Kennedy said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: anthonykennedy; fascist; kennedy; oligarchy; pos; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-307 next last

1 posted on 06/24/2005 1:13:52 PM PDT by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Boy, was it a mistake to place this guy on the SC.


2 posted on 06/24/2005 1:14:50 PM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Half the Supreme Court is full of idiots . Defend that.


3 posted on 06/24/2005 1:15:43 PM PDT by Blogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
"When judges are attacked unfairly, it's proper for the bar over the course of time, in a professional and elegant way, to explain to the public the meaning of the rule of the law," Kennedy told several hundred lawyers attending the Florida Bar's annual meeting.

Translation: "You peons aren't smart enough to understand our brilliant legal minds"

4 posted on 06/24/2005 1:15:44 PM PDT by So Cal Rocket (Proud Member: Internet Pajama Wearers for Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Impeachment is necessary and needed. It was never meant by the Founders to be an occasional once in a blue moon solution. The Founders expected impeachment would be needed on a regular basis to properly guard our freedoms.


5 posted on 06/24/2005 1:16:30 PM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
"Judicial independence is so that a judge can do what he has to do or what she must do," Kennedy said.

I guess that's an adequate explanation of penumbras, emanations, and the need to resort to international law when there's nothing in US law to justify your decisions.
6 posted on 06/24/2005 1:16:31 PM PDT by A Balrog of Morgoth (With fire, sword, and stinging whip I drive the RINOs in terror before me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
When is Justice Kennedy's feeding tube going to be disconnected. He is obviously brain dead. Then we can take his family's property and put up a condo or maybe a WalMart on it.
7 posted on 06/24/2005 1:16:58 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (Bork should have had Kennedy's USSC seat and Kelo v. New London would have gone the other way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Patriots must defend American from judiciary attacks.


8 posted on 06/24/2005 1:17:02 PM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

I'm a lawyer, and my inclination is to pile on. The courts are engaged in the most collossal abuse of power ever witnessed in this country since its founding. The current Supreme Court should be removed from the bench by Constitutional amendment, and every decision rendered by it since 1965 should be declared without precedental value.


9 posted on 06/24/2005 1:17:51 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
It seems to me that this statement

Some critics believe that the idea of judicial independence gives judges the ability to rule however they want to, but the opposite is true, Kennedy said.

is contradicted by this one:

"Judicial independence is so that a judge can do what he has to do or what she must do," Kennedy said.

10 posted on 06/24/2005 1:17:56 PM PDT by skip_intro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Lawyers should speak up and explain the judicial process when judges come under attack, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy told members of the Florida Bar on Friday.

Ain't enough lawyers in the world to keep me from saying what I think of you, Kennedy. You've earned every word of scorn I can heap on your sorry usurping scalp.

11 posted on 06/24/2005 1:17:59 PM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Oh, yeah! Sure!
Rule 1. How can you tell when a lawyer is lying?
When his/her lips are moving.
Rule 2. What is a judge?
An attorney in a robe.


12 posted on 06/24/2005 1:18:04 PM PDT by Ramonan (Honor does not go out of style.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

And this comes on the heels of the Eminent Domain decision because... Anyone, anyone?

;(


13 posted on 06/24/2005 1:18:07 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion (May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Isn't Justice Kennedy the one who looks to "international law" and Europe to determine how he should decide opinions on U.S. law?


14 posted on 06/24/2005 1:18:33 PM PDT by LibFreeOrDie (L'chaim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
What is worrisome is when the criticism isn't just focused on a decision but at the judiciary, and increasingly, individual judges

Kennedy believes judges are infallible.

15 posted on 06/24/2005 1:18:48 PM PDT by NautiNurse ("I'd rather see someone go to work for a Republican campaign than sit on their butt."--Howard Dean)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Some critics believe that the idea of judicial independence gives judges the ability to rule however they want to, but the opposite is true, Kennedy said.

"Judicial independence is so that a judge can do what he has to do or what she must do," Kennedy said.

What you had to do was uphold the 5th Amendment in Kelo v. New London. You failed miserably.

16 posted on 06/24/2005 1:19:05 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (Bork should have had Kennedy's USSC seat and Kelo v. New London would have gone the other way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

"Lawyers should speak up and explain the judicial process when judges come under attack, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy told members of the Florida Bar on Friday."


My trust for lawyers ranks right up there with the judiciary.


17 posted on 06/24/2005 1:19:24 PM PDT by cripplecreek (I zot trolls for fun and profit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
What is worrisome is when the criticism isn't just focused on a decision but at the judiciary, and increasingly, individual judges, he said. Lawyers can act as an intermediary between the decisions made by judges and the larger society by explaining, he added.

What? Explaining that 50% of the Court is nuts? I don't need a lawyer to tell me that!

18 posted on 06/24/2005 1:19:33 PM PDT by Dr.Syn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Justice Kennedy: Lawyers Must Defend Judiciary From Attacks

Any more decisions like yesterday and those lawyers will need armor and air support.

19 posted on 06/24/2005 1:19:55 PM PDT by Freebird Forever (Imagine if islam controlled the internet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
He sounds scared. Well, maybe he had better think twice about being an ACTIVIST judge, if he doesn't like the activism his decisions create. Is he saying that us idiots out here are suppose to sit down and shut up once the Almighty speak from the big white building in DC.
20 posted on 06/24/2005 1:20:14 PM PDT by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-307 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson