Posted on 12/30/2005 4:43:03 PM PST by Delphinium
A candidate friend of mine has been asked to answer this question:
"Judicial liberalism is a major concern for the prolife movement...... It seems clear to us that Congress has collectively failed to to fulfill its duty to check to check the growing power of the federal judiciary. If elected what are you prepared to do to help restore balance between the branches of the federal government."
My question is what specifically could a congressman do to restore the balance of power?
A congressman can (and has the duty to) vote to impeach any judge that is not obeying the law.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, 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.Congress can cut off just about any issue from federal-court review, including abortion.
1. Reorganize the Federal Court system. Breaking up the 9th Circuit is a good start.
2. Impeach bad judges. Although that may be problematic if the impeachment is based solely on their opinions.
3. Limit the jurisdiction of federal courts.
4. Pass legislation that reverses bad decisions.
Quite frankly, I think the average Congressman needs to learn to control his own lust for power and federal usurpation of such first, and then worry about the Judiciary after that.
Such as the penumbras business that has been enshrined post roe v.wade. Congress could specifically delineate to the Court to not engage in such behavior, or face disciplinary action. That is the check on the judiciary. They are people who are fallible, and are not gods who's wisdom is sacrosanct.
What's so problematic about impeaching a judge who "orders" a legislature to raise taxes?
That's the sole duty of a legislature in the Federal and most all states' constitutions.
You have it right -- but it will take a lot of cojones - or a major outrage from the public.
Pass laws that are not subject to judicial review. this is already being done in some cases.
This is a good point. Congress may make laws and actions not subject to federal judicial review! At least for every court that isn't the supreme court.
According to the plan of the convention, all judges who may be appointed by the United States are to hold their offices DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR; which is conformable to the most approved of the State constitutions and among the rest, to that of this State. Its propriety having been drawn into question by the adversaries of that plan, is no light symptom of the rage for objection, which disorders their imaginations and judgments. The standard of good behavior for the continuance in office of the judicial magistracy, is certainly one of the most valuable of the modern improvements in the practice of government. In a monarchy it is an excellent barrier to the despotism of the prince; in a republic it is a no less excellent barrier to the encroachments and oppressions of the representative body. And it is the best expedient which can be devised in any government, to secure a steady, upright, and impartial administration of the laws.
Federalist No. 78
Remove judges who do not uphold the constitution,i.e.Eminent Domain
Remember, if laws against abortion were unpopular, then the libs wouldn't need Roe.
There's a Senate, too, where there's a real lack of cojones.
Congress has the power to limit the scope of the judiciary, but what has not been done is to hold congressional hearings on controversial rulings handed down by the court.
Why shouldn't judges be asked to explain, to the Congress, the source material they used to come to a decision?
Abortion, eminent domain, privacy "rights" for homosexuals, the "wall of separation" between church and state, have all been controversial decisions that have impacted society without any action by Congress to delve into the logic or rationale behind the decisions.
If the judiciary is truly the third branch of our republican government then it should be held to account for its decisions. Right now the judiciary is accountable to no one.
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.