Posted on 10/21/2006 5:35:56 PM PDT by wagglebee
Deeply controversial issues like abortion and suicide rights have nothing to do with the Constitution, and unelected judges too often choose to find new rights at the expense of the democratic process, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Saturday.
Scalia, during a talk on the judiciary sponsored by the National Italian American Foundation, dismissed the idea of judicial independence as an absolute virtue. He noted that dozens of states, since the mid-1800s, have chosen to let citizens elect their judges.
"You talk about independence as though it is unquestionably and unqualifiably a good thing," Scalia said. "It may not be. It depends on what your courts are doing."
Scalia added, "The more your courts become policy-makers, the less sense it makes to have them entirely independent."
Scalia, a leading conservative voice after 20 years on the court, said people naturally get upset with the growing number of cases in which a federal court intrudes on social issues better handled by the political process.
"Take the abortion issue," he said. "Whichever side wins, in the courts, the other side feels cheated. I mean, you know, there's something to be said for both sides."
"The court could have said, 'No, thank you.' The court have said, you know, 'There is nothing in the Constitution on the abortion issue for either side,'" Scalia said. "It could have said the same thing about suicide, it could have said the same thing about . . . you know, all the social issues the courts are now taking."
Scalia said courts didn't use to decide social issues like that.
"It is part of the new philosophy of the Constitution," he said. "And when you push the courts into that, and when they leap into it, they make themselves politically controversial. And that's what places their independence at risk."
Justice Samuel Alito Jr., the newest member of the Supreme Court, agreed that "the same thing exists, but to a lesser degree, with the lower courts."
How about "murder during childbirth"?
I don't know. You can't tell from "polls." As I always say, the only poll that counts is the one taking on election day at your designated precinct.
We might be surprised by even some of the "Blue States."
It seems clear that the majority of voters want limits to "abortion on demand," or as I say, "Kill any baby, any time, any reason." It's a start.
Very well said.
Thanks!
California might go either way. I think New York, Mass., Conn, RI and DC will keep abortion no matter what.
I guess you didn't get the memo. The 1st Amendment has been reworded to say that religion should not exist in public, and the rest of the amendment is only extended to liberals. Amendments 2, 9 and 10 no longer exist.
I would think that for the most part these are federal issues because of interstate commerce.
We'd have to see - and of course it could be re-voted any time, by changing the state legislators. That's how our system is supposed to work.
It's not ideal - killing innocent people shouldn't be negotiable by the voters - but it would be a big improvement on the status quo.
Anything would be an improvement.
LOL...
Yes, Yes I am...8^)
You can imagine the look on my face when they told me I was out of luck.
The question will become just what sort of conservative will drive the movement?
Mark
How is it that if I grow for my own use? The getaround of laws protecting interstate commerce was used in the RICO act for everything from bootlegging of liquor to protesting of abortion clinics. The federal government should stay out of the states business and be limited to what it was originally put together for and that was to protect the borders and collect tariffs not to tax anything that moves, and turn a blind eye to the borders seeing them as potential votes.
Scalia makes eminent sense...usually.
But courts do have a role to play in fundamental life and death matters. Abortion is one such area of inquiry - the life of a human being. Courts do have the obligation to protect human beings from butchers. And Courts do have a role to play in protecting the old and infirm from unscrupulous thanatophiles.
Scalia makes so much sense every time he opens his mouth, he should be the most admired man in America.
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.