You Lose

Judges aren’t immune to public opinion, as is once again proved by the instant backtracking performed by Judge Alfred T. Goodwin of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Within hours of outraging the overwhelming majority of his fellow citizens by declaring the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional, Judge Goodwin decided, without comment, to put his decision on hold, perhaps anticipating that his ruling would be quickly overturned on appeal.

Funny, isn’t it, how this particular ruling riled the public, a public that has quietly swallowed all sorts of culturally destructive judicial usurpation by other federal judges over the years.

The idea that the phrase “under God,” inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, violates the establishment clause of the Constitution may, as Judge Ferdinand Fernandez observed in his partial dissent, be technically correct, but it flies in the face of common sense, which is supposed to underlie the law. Displaying common sense himself, the dissenting circuit court judge said phrases such as “under God” or “In God We Trust” have “no tendency to establish religion in this country,” except in the eyes of those “who most fervently would like to drive all tincture of religion out of the public life of our polity.”

The majority ruling by the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit, the most overturned appeals court in the land, was preposterous to be sure, and it was easy to understand and to oppose. That said, the fact is judicial usurpation has wrought much greater damage to us than this nonsense would have.

The same court struck down as unconstitutional the official English Language Amendment to Arizona’s state constitution. A single federal judge in Missouri decided to soak taxpayers more than a billion dollars in an ill-fated attempt to make Kansas City schools attractive enough to lure white students back into them. The voters in Colorado decided by ballot to amend their constitution to prohibit special legal provisions for homosexuals. The U.S. Supreme Court struck it down. Another single federal judge, acting on her iron whim and personal prejudices, overturned a law passed by California voters barring certain welfare benefits to illegal aliens. The list goes on and on, far beyond the space I have to detail them.

Despite all of the fuss kicked up by this week’s judicial absurdity, there is no prospect whatsoever that Congress will reign in these appointed despots on the federal bench. Members of Congress know that the media favor liberal judicial activism and that to oppose it is to guarantee media opposition. Those representatives who are nominally conservative are allowed to rant a bit against the judicial excesses, but to actually do something about it would jeopardize their cushy jobs.

Congress loves to pass high-minded legislation, couched in feel-good language, and leave it to the courts to decide the hard particulars on a case-by-case basis. Your elected representatives don’t represent you at all, at least not most of the time. As we’ve pointed out recently, elections come and go, but press and pressure are constant. You lose.

"Those representatives who are nominally conservative are allowed to rant a bit against the judicial excesses, but to actually"

"nominally conservative" is like being partially pregnant, you either are or you are not. A matter of principle is involved, but, politicians, by and large, are unprincipled.

Three certanties are prevalent: Death, Taxes and Betrayal by politicians regardless of their labels.

"The same court struck down as unconstitutional the official English Language Amendment to Arizona’s state constitution. A single federal judge in Missouri decided to soak taxpayers more than a billion dollars in an ill-fated attempt to make Kansas City schools attractive enough to lure white students back into them. The voters in Colorado decided by ballot to amend their constitution to prohibit special legal provisions for homosexuals. The U.S. Supreme Court struck it down. Another single federal judge, acting on her iron whim and personal prejudices, overturned a law passed by California voters barring certain welfare benefits to illegal aliens. The list goes on and on, far beyond the space I have to detail them."

Guys, "Judicial activism" = giving the whims of politically appointed bureaucrats the color and power {that's guns} of law, WITHOUT LEGITIMACY. As Ron says, "YOU LOSE!!" Peace and love, George.

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.