Replies

Debra Saunders gets her conclusion wrong. Federal judges are NOT chosen in elections. If they were, most of their wooly headed Lefties would have been gone along ago. The California courts have their judges confirmed in retention election and if a court gets too ideologically extreme, voters can send judges a message by giving them the boot like they did to the Rose Bird Supreme Court here over a decade and a half ago. What's frustrating is we have few means of bring the Nine Circus to heel and they can stick it to us when they want and we have recourse in the matter - except civil disobedience? I'd like to see California go ahead with the election no matter how they rule. The Nine Circus would have to order the federal government to round up every voter and put them in a concentration camp. Let them try to enforce it.

What's frustrating is we have few means of bring the Nine Circus to heel and they can stick it to us when they want and we have recourse in the matter - except civil disobedience

This is what happens when judges are appointed to their lifetime offices instead of being elected by the people.

An independent Judiciary sounds nice in theory, but in practice it becomes despotic in its practices. The communist manifesto sounded great when reading it, but look what happened when it was put into practice.

Federal Court Justices are only human, and will react to unrestrained power just as any human would. The Ninth Circuit is a good example of what happens when humans are given unaccountable power for a lifetime. When people ask how to get rid of the Ninth Circuit they should ask by what Constitutional means did they get their offices in the first place.

In radical librealism the "independent Judiciary" is not a means to let Justices do their work free of the people's restraint, but a means of doing their work to "restrain" the people.

Because the Founding Fathers didn't "adequately" see the threat to Republicanism from an unrestrained Judiciary the people now have only Congress to check the excesses of the Federal Court. If the people are to influence the Court is must do so through the people they send to Washington. If Congress doesn't do its job then the Founders left the people the tool of "amendment" to remedy the situation.

That's exactly what the author said:

They took a decades-old voting mechanism that helped elect the presidents who appointed them ...

...they should recuse themselves, having won their place on the bench through such a discredited system.

She never said they were directly elected.