Posted on 08/09/2005 8:57:47 PM PDT by mrobison
CHICAGO - Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer said Tuesday that rulings on difficult subjects like gay rights and the death penalty have left courts vulnerable to political attacks that are threatening judicial independence.
| ADVERTISEMENT |
Breyer urged lawyers to help educate people about court responsibility to be an independent decision-maker.
"If you say seven or eight or nine members of the Supreme Court feel there's a problem ... you're right," he told the American Bar Association. "It's this edge on a lot of issues."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., who was speaking with Breyer, said: "The politics of judges is getting to be red hot." He said Supreme Court rulings on the Pledge of Allegiance and Ten Commandments have captured the public's interest and polarized Democrats and Republicans.
"There's nothing that's not on the table," former Solicitor General Theodore Olson said of the court's work, which this fall includes issues like abortion, capital punishment and assisted suicide.
Breyer said the nine-member court is focused on constitutional limits on major fights of the day. "We're sort of at the outer bounds. And we can't control politics of it, and I don't think you want us to try to control politics of it," he said.
Congressional leaders including House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, have criticized justices in recent months. DeLay was particularly critical of the court's refusal to stop Terri Schiavo's death and at a death penalty decision that cited international cases.
Breyer defended using overseas legal opinions as a guide only, adding, "It has hit a political nerve."
Breyer, Olson and Graham were discussing the future of courts on the final day of the ABA's annual meeting in Chicago.
Also Tuesday, the group was debating whether to endorse federal protection for journalists who refuse to reveal their sources to prosecutors. Passage of such a measure would authorize the organization to lobby Congress, where "shield law" proposals are pending.
Judicial independence has been a major theme at the meeting of the ABA, a 400,000-member group.
The group's policymaking board passed a resolution urging elected officials and others to support and defend judges. New group President Michael Greco of Boston said judges have faced physical threats, and threats of impeachment from Washington political leaders unhappy with court decisions.
"If we do not protect our courts, our courts cannot protect us," Greco said.
On another subject, Greco defended the ABA's role in checking the background of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts and other federal judicial nominees. The committee has spent the past two weeks reviewing Roberts' work on an appeals court and interviewing people who have worked with him.
"The ABA does not, and we will not, protect the interests of any political party or faction, nor the interests of any ideological or interest group," said Greco, who previously oversaw the judge review committee.
Breyer told the group that the retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor is a personal loss and loss for the nation.
Just as soon as one of these black robed emporers can point out where in the Constitution it says Americans have the God given right to murder the unborn, I will stop criticizing.
The supreme court, however, seems to think that it is somehow above checks and balances, and that any talk that they might have made a bad decision is somehow threatening the structure of the republic. BS. If they make up the law, congress can impeach them.
That is a message to the baby shredders and fudge packers.
To the Body of Christ, I urge the mounting of an uncompromising defense of the pre-born.
The slaughter must stop.
I'm wondering if we can't just get a 2-for-1 deal and send Breyer packing with O'Connor...
Translation:
"We are getting very irritated when you...the Great Unwashed... have the temerity to question decisions that come down from Mount Olympus. We do not answer to You."
bttt
Yup. Spoken like a true Elitist.
If he'd just stop making stupid decisions, then the criticism would stop.
There you go again... You conservatives... You aren't allowed to say that kind of stuff...
OF course Breyer would NEVER admit that. In his mind only Conservatives are worthy of criticism.
Note to SCOTUS: Unconstitutional judicial activism SHOULD invite "criticism". If that doesn't work, more severe remedies COULD be in order.
Note to SCOTUS: Unconstitutional judicial activism SHOULD invite "criticism". If that doesn't work, more severe remedies COULD be in order.
"Breyer defended using overseas legal opinions as a guide only, adding, "It has hit a political nerve."
Duh.....the founders created the US Constitution and not to defer to foreign governments from which they fled.
So Stevie B. gets a little offended when we catch the black-robed tyrants doing their own thing and lording it over us all? Too bad. We have just as much voice as he. Time to eminent domain his property and use his own ruling against him. Schmuck!
Judicial Independence has become code for, or a euphemism for Judicial Supremacy.
And you're right that this is an arrogant attitude held by Breyer. He's basically saying that the Courts' reckless and outrageous usurpation of power from the people and the states must be accepted w/o question or we are guilty of questioning the independence of the Courts. Who are we to dare question the invention out of thin air new rights to abortion and gay marriage? Who are we to dare disagree that the First Amendment stricture against Congress establishing a national religion also forbids the placing of nativity scenes on public grounds? Who are we to insist on deciding for ourselves those issues that the Framers of the Constitution clearly didn't see fit to elevate above the normal democratic process? Who are we to insist on self governance?
This is a very convenient attitude for people like Breyer, who shares part of the blame for turning the Sup Court into a political body, and for those who turn to the Courts to have imposed what they can't implement through the proper channels.
Not me. That's just the beginning. Remember the eminent domain debacle? Etc!
Make NO mistake, WE ( originalist/conservatives ) defend a DEAD Constitution !
That's right. The American people and their elected representatives have had the temerity to criticize their philosopher kings (and queen). While some people (such as Justice Antonin Scalia) say that this is the natural result of the Court anointing itself a super legislature whose rulings need be only marginally grounded in the Constitution, Breyer sees an uppity populace as a dire threat.
I might be crazy but I think criticism of our leaders, even those who don't attain power through anything so gauche as elections, is a good thing. Now I'm not crazy. I'm not going to say that such political speech is as important as, say, topless dancing or virtual child pornography. But, all in all, I think that the Republic can survive criticisms of Justices.
"Lawgiver in Black"; it's not just a sarcastic phrase anymore.
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.