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

To: indcons

Judges should be free from retaliation. But that doesn’t mean that the judicial function shouldn’t have to answer to the other two branches of government. Removing the ability of the judicial system to have juristiction over certain kinds of cases is not retaliation against judges. Our 3 branches of government were meant to be interdependent, not independent.


2 posted on 07/24/2007 6:21:43 AM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: RonF
RonF wrote:
Judges should be free from retaliation

Wrong, wrong, WRONG!

There MUST be the ability to "retaliate" against judges, lest they become courthouse kings above reproach.

This grows all the more important for high-court justices. Their MUST be limits and checks upon their judicial powers and opinions.

To quote Gerald Ford in his brief (but Lincolnesque) speech on the steps of his home the night of Nixon's resignation:
"Here, the people rule."

The people.
NOT Justices and judges.

When a judge or justice - or a full court - issues a ruling that is outrageous, that judge or justice must face personal consequences.

Sandra Day O'Connor was a fool. Wasn't she the one who mentioned the importance of "international law" in reaching U.S. Supreme Court decisions?

- John

13 posted on 07/24/2007 6:42:23 AM PDT by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

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