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

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Has Been Contributing to Social Decay, (Edith) Jones Argues
Virginia Law ^ | January 30, 2003 | M. Marshall

Posted on 09/21/2005 7:00:55 PM PDT by NeoCaveman

Since the 1960s, the U.S. Supreme Court has been issuing decisions contrary to the generally held values of Americans, imposing a "modish, untested philosophical notions and extreme libertarianism that would have left the [Constitution's] Framers aghast," Edith Jones, a judge on the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, told a packed room Jan. 28 in a speech sponsored by The Federalist Society.

This series of decisions has done "more to jeopardize than sustain" the future of American society, which she said stands "as the most successful and long-lived experiment in self-government and human freedom in history."

She attributed that success to the framers' principles of limited government and personal honor and virtue. The framers' standards of personal conduct were based on the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule and, whatever the influences of Enlightenment thought might have been, the nation's foundational values were Biblical.

Surveys show that "95 percent of Americans say they believe in God. People everywhere subscribe to the values of the Ten Commandments—don't steal, don't kill, don't covet—however they are phrased," she said.

The Court "got out in front of the self-governing society, overturning local authorities and self-governing groups and imposed these values on society," Jones declared. "I love this country. I love the heritage on which it was built. I want my children to have that heritage. Once people lose self-control it results in the growth of repressive government. When you don't have internal control, you have to have external ones."

Jones outlined five areas in which decisions have had what she considers socially damaging consequences: crime and punishment, pornography, family relations, public order and youth and education. The Warren Court, she contended, "extravagantly assumed the power to dictate new 'rights' not expressly stated in the Constitution and in so doing foisted its philosophical vision on the United States with consequences far beyond the Court's imagining."

The Court has made good decisions over these years but the harmful ones have never been "wholly overruled, although the court has refrained from carrying out their implications to the fullest extent and, on occasion, has retreated."

She does not think the decisions alone accounted for the cultural trend. "The Dred Scott case did not cause the Civil War. But Dred Scott proves that we cannot and should not ignore the social implications of the Supreme Court's decisions."

In the area of crime and punishment, she said that in the '60s and '70s crime was thought to be attributable to social problems such as racism and poverty and that criminal behavior was even posited as "a logical response to a repressive society." Supreme Court decisions wanted society to "play fair in a legalistic sense with lawbreakers" and so "constitutionalized" criminal procedure. She ticked off a 20-item list of new rules that transformed the way investigations, prosecutions and incarcerations are handled and that turned justice into a matter of "gamesmanship between the accused and the state.

"The cat-and-mouse nature of the criminal justice system encourages a criminal to try to beat the odds and, if he is caught, to disdain guilt or responsibility. The present system inhibits the criminal from developing the contrition that is necessary to turn him away from bad behavior," she said. The rulings have contributed to a more "brutish society."

The court saw pornography as "being about free speech," she said, ignoring "the ancient and consistent antecedents of the laws they were overturning."

She drew a chuckle from the mostly male audience when she read from the majority opinion in Stanley v. Georgia that a man has a "right to satisfy his intellectual needs in the privacy of his home," and asked if men are answering "intellectual" needs when they look at pornography. She likewise ridiculed another statement in the ruling in Ginsburg v. New York that said parents are not barred from buying magazines containing nudity for their children. "Who can imagine parents purchasing obscene magazines for their children—much less that the Supreme Court would appear to condone it?" she wondered.

Pornography exploits women and children and "puts sex on the level of a bodily function," and is now hardly confined to the home, she pointed out. It is pervasive on the Internet, in movies and advertising and on television, she said, with the result that modesty has declined and "the rest of the world sees us as immoral.

"The explosion of pornography and the degradation of sex move us toward a society both brutish and solitary," she lamented.

In a series of decisions bearing on family relations, the court ended the legal distinctions between legitimate and natural children with the result that the marriage has been destabilized as an institution, and children suffer as a result. "Society must erect legal support for the more difficult but ultimately more fulfilling commitments of marriage. There is no proof that a healthy society can exist or perpetuate itself without that institution," she said.

In the area of public order she argued that the court transmogrified free speech into free expression so that "Shakespeare is on a par with Larry Flynt's Hustler." She said the gist of that trend has been to prove George Orwell was right when he said that when the quality of language is debased, the precision of thought suffers.

She also faulted the court for a "loss of order in schools" that she implied resulted in school environments in which shootings now happen. "School discipline is about the rule of the social compact," she maintained, and one thing schools teach is respect for law. The authority of school boards and officials was "chilled" by decisions such as Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District and Goss v. Lopez, which she said gave a misplaced adult-like autonomy to children. She said that trend has since subsided.

"By devaluing personal responsibility for good conduct, the Court's decisions have propelled society back toward a pre-social contract state of nature," she said. "Only a very wealthy society can indulge such a large share of degradation as we have done."

Although the court has retrenched on some of its rulings, the moral foundation of self-control is necessary to self-governance and must be fortified. "Laws can slow the decay of morals, but they cannot restore morals," she said. "The Constitution is not a suicide compact. Judges should not issue decisions that are fatal to society."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: culturewars; edithjones; framers; scotus; selfgovernment; uva
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: inquest
Anyone know how she is on 4th-amendment-type issues?

She's more Scalia than Thomas if that answers your question. If it doesn't answer your question try to narrow the question and I'll do more research.

21 posted on 10/29/2005 7:41:31 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS..... or Alito, Jones, Williams, Sykes, or Luttig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
[Anyone know how she is on 4th-amendment-type issues?]

She's more Scalia than Thomas if that answers your question. If it doesn't answer your question try to narrow the question and I'll do more research.

Do you know of any examples that would illustrate this? I didn't mean for you to go out of your way or anything; I was just wondering if you knew offhand.

22 posted on 10/29/2005 7:49:52 PM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Do you know of any examples that would illustrate this? I didn't mean for you to go out of your way or anything; I was just wondering if you knew offhand.

It's no trouble at all my friend.

In my opinion, and I don't know if this helps you at all is that Jones is basically the female Scalia.

23 posted on 10/29/2005 7:52:04 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS..... or Alito, Jones, Williams, Sykes, or Luttig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
It gives me a general idea. I'm more of a Thomas type of guy myself, but Scalia's certainly within my tolerance range.
24 posted on 10/29/2005 8:11:05 PM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident

After Miers, 56 sounds so young. :-)

You are right in pointing out that Janice Rogers Brown is almost the same age.

Janice Rogers Brown has other strong offsets. Her nomination, going into the election year will dent the Democrats severely.


25 posted on 10/29/2005 8:15:30 PM PDT by indianrightwinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: indianrightwinger
Her nomination, going into the election year will dent the Democrats severely.

Quite so. And that means even if the Dems manage to filibuster her, it could severely cost them in '06, resulting in a Senate that would be more likely to confirm her.

26 posted on 10/29/2005 8:18:42 PM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: inquest

Winning more Senate seats is a BIGGER issue politically speaking than anything. It will reduce the influence of RINOs, and put the supposed moderates like Graham (R-SC) in place.


27 posted on 10/29/2005 8:21:11 PM PDT by indianrightwinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: indianrightwinger

There is only one way you could get Janice Rogers Brown on SCOTUS and that is tell the Dems that if they shoot her down the next pick would be Edith Jones who has taken on Roe directly.


28 posted on 10/29/2005 8:23:08 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS..... or Alito, Jones, Williams, Sykes, or Luttig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident

One more bump to the top for Edith Jones before I crash out for the night.


29 posted on 10/29/2005 9:22:27 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (#1 Edith Jones, #2 Janice Rogers Brown, #3 Luttig. #4 Alito, #5 Williams, #6 Sykes, I like em all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 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