This article promotes two ideas:
I supported the Federal Marriage Amendment and lost interest in Fred Thompson as a Presidential Candidate when he thought it best to leave this to states, ignoring the judicial threat that would lead to. A political solution that set the standard that the court must uphold was the ideal solution. Perhaps it was too hard to implement.
But I'm not sure preemptive restriction of the courts is a good solution for the current problems. How many issues need preemptive restrictions? Where does it end?
Neither is court elimination. Sure, who wouldn't love to see the 9th circus disbanded. But are we going to eliminate courts every time a judge or set of judges become problematic? Is it the court structure or the judge that is the problem?
I maintain it's the judge. I think the Executive needs an office of judical review that evaluates the rulings of controversial judges, puts together a case for their impeachment and submits it to Congress.
Impeaching judges requires more votes that eliminating courts. But it is the judge that is the issue. And impeaching judges puts all judges on notice.
Eliminating courts may be the easier path, but it's a path that probably needs to be closed. Sure we could eliminate the 9th circuit. And when democrats are in power that could eliminate the entire court structure and rebuild it in their image, staffing it completely with their pics.
And that is a danger that exists unless we close that path. We need to make it as hard to eliminate courts as it is to impeach a judge.
Nothing prevents a president from presenting to Congress a case for impeaching a judge.
The law schools produce these activist judges. A giant in the teaching and textbook authorship part of the profession said that now, judges decide the result they want in a case and skew words to get there.
The only remedy is lawyers trained in true legal philosophy, reasoning and ethics.
The law schools produce these activist judges. A giant in the teaching and textbook authorship part of the profession said that now, judges decide the result they want in a case and skew words to get there.
The only remedy is lawyers trained in true legal philosophy, reasoning and ethics.
* * *