[Marauder]

Our founding fathers were some of the most intelligent men ever assembled in such a number, and the foresight they had in crafting this government was phenomenal to say the least.

But I believe the one mistake they made was that when the Constitution was drafted, their experience taught them that judges were among the most honorable men available and could be counted on to discharge their duty with integrity and wisdom. That was probably true then.

But not now. Today's judges, e.g., those idiots in the Ninth Circus in CA, and some of the flaming liberals on the SCOTUS - Ginsberg, Souter, and Kennedy come to mind - have shown us the dire need for some sort of control, to rein in those that are becoming derelict in their duty in creating new law out of whole cloth.

[freedomcrusader]

I was about to diagree with you, and say that the Founders would have expected that "dishonorable" judges would have been impeached, but then I remembered the supermajority requirement in the Senate to have a judge removed.

Which means that it goes back to the 17th Amendment. As the "State Legislatures' body", I doubt justices would have held office for long if they kept overturning state laws willy nilly. It seems that the legislatures would demand that their Senator, in effect their representative in the Fed Gov, yank such justices in a hurry.

[Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS]

But I believe the one mistake they made was that when the Constitution was drafted, their experience taught them that judges were among the most honorable men available and could be counted on to discharge their duty with integrity and wisdom. That was probably true then. posted on 09/26/2003 2:20 PM CDT by Marauder

I was about to diagree with you, and say that the Founders would have expected that "dishonorable" judges would have been impeached, but then I remembered the supermajority requirement in the Senate to have a judge removed. posted on 09/26/2003 2:51 PM CDT by freedomcrusader

According to the plan of the convention, all judges who may be appointed by the United States are to hold their offices DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR

...the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them.... The judiciary...has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

***

...It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. ... from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security. The Avalon Project : Federalist No 78

...But the judges under this constitution will control the legislature, for the supreme court are authorised in the last resort, to determine what is the extent of the powers of the Congress. They are to give the constitution an explanation, and there is no power above them to set aside their judgment. The framers of this constitution appear to have followed that of the British, in rendering the judges independent, by granting them their offices during good behavior, without following the constitution of England, in instituting a tribunal in which their errors may be corrected; and without adverting to this, that the judicial under this system have a power which is above the legislative, and which indeed transcends any power before given to a judicial by any free government under heaven.

***

...There is no power above them, to control any of their decisions. There is no authority that can remove them, and they cannot be controlled by the laws of the legislature. In short, they are independent of the people, of the legislature, and of every power under heaven. Men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of heaven itself. Before I proceed to illustrate the truth of these reflections, I beg liberty to make one remark. Though in my opinion the judges ought to hold their offices during good behavior, yet I think it is clear, that the reasons in favor of this establishment of the judges in England, do by no means apply to this country. Antifederalist No. 78-79

Article III

Section 1.

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

"Congress has withdrawn jurisdiction in the past from the lower federal courts when it became dissatisfied with their performance or concluded that state courts were the better forum for certain types of cases. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld Congress's power to do so." -Edwin Meese III. "Putting the Federal Judiciary Back on the Constitutional Track" , Congress Must Curb the Imperial Judiciary