Posted on 11/13/2005 3:56:14 PM PST by Crackingham
The House of Representatives is mounting a backdoor effort to place a split of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a budget reduction bill. If successful, this is a "lose-lose" proposition for California and for the consistency of the federal courts on the Pacific Coast.
Clearly, the independence of the judiciary is under attack by those who disagree with some of the court's rulings. The split would also initially cost an estimated $100 million, because two new and expensive bureaucracies would be needed to administer the courts. And it would cost $16 million more in annual operating expenses. It would also create a huge imbalance in caseloads between the two new circuits, with California's judges forced to hear many more cases than their peers in other states.
Why is the 9th Circuit so important, and how does it affect our everyday lives? The Supreme Court reviews only 1% of the cases appealed to it. So for most of the residents in the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction, it is their court of last resort. Last year, the 9th Circuit reviewed more than 15,000 cases, making decisions on every legal issue under the sun, including environmental protection, workplace discrimination, consumer rights, property disputes, fraud and individual freedoms. Moreover, these decisions affect not only the rights of those whose cases are argued before the 9th Circuit, they shape the law for all those who follow.
The founders designed our federal courts to be independent decision-making bodies, free of political pressure. The House's effort to split the 9th Circuit is an assault on this independence.
It is judicial "gerrymandering" designed to isolate and punish judges. This is a partisan effort to redraw the boundaries of the circuit courts to create a much more conservative bench in the proposed 12th Circuit.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Why do my senators suck
I've got to hand it to the LA Times, they certainly aren't afraid of giving some the most important reasons why the 9th Circuit Court should be reigned in. I'd add that I blieve it is the court whose rulings are most often overturned by the SCOTUS. At times it amounts to little more than a rogue court.
Pish, tosh, Ms. Feinstein....why in the world are you worrying about the money it would cost to do this...when your party has asked for no less than 5 independent commissions on Bush's behaviour....
How much money do you think those waste???
Besides, we know why you want it kept intact...you LIKE them giving teachers and sex therapists more power over our children than we parents have...
YOU want a court that will uphold partial birth abortion...you are a sick, sick woman.
Please justify for us, Senator, why the 9th is the most reversed District Court in the country and why the other western states shouldn't have a court which makes rulings in accordance with the Constitution.
Keep the 9th for yourselves in CA and let the rest have competent judges
THIS IS HOW SPLITTING THE CIRCUIT WOULD WORK:
"The proposal would split the 9th Circuit into a new 9th Circuit, made up of California, Hawaii, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, and a new 12th Circuit, made up of Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington and Alaska."
What B.S.
Actually, I'd have to say that it's because the right does a very poor job of getting it's message out in California. Boxer and Feinstein do walkovers basically because nobody of stature is run against them. In most instances, the right gets what it deserves in California for not running solid conservatives who can articulate why these two should never have achieved public office in the first place. Yes we have uninformed voters for sure, but I question whose fault that is, and have come to the conclusion that we can't skewer the voters if we're not going to make a solid case for them to consider.
Hmm, smaller caseloads per judge.
Sounds pretty controversial to me.
And what percentage of cases out of those coming just from the 9th circuit? Why does she avoid the more specific relevant statistic?
Sounds like money well spent to me. Of course, it would be cheaper if we just used the 'good behavior' clause. Either way, anything that reduces the ability of the 9th Circuit to legislate is fine by me.
Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington and Alaskan citizens must be on their knees praying this goes through.
Senator Not-so-fine-stein's disapproval is the ultimate endorsement for spitting up the 9th Circus.
How else can the legislative branch balance the outrageous bench, unless it does so with budget and organizational changes? I've often thought that congress should simply suspend the 9th's budget: let 'em rule as they wish, but do it on their own nickel.
Isn't that the case now? Even more so, actually?
Article: "It is judicial "gerrymandering" designed to isolate and punish judges."
Right. Some of the Judges, such as "JUDGE" Stephen Reinhardt deserve to be turfrd right OFF the bench.
Here are bullets of questions upheld by the 9th:
Six parents sued the Palmdale, Calif., School District after finding out their kids had been asked a series of sexual questions in class. They included asking the elementary school cchildren about the frequency of:
Touching my private parts too much ( note: this is pesonal and private, no one should be asking a question like this accept a parent)
Thinking about having sex ( note: what any child thinks about on sex is a question that only a parent should ask)
Thinking about touching other people's private parts
( Note: if the child has NOT been thnking about it, they likely will after the questions are asked and discussed)
Thinking about sex when I don't want to
( Note: some children who haven't been abused , ie most of them, will think they sex justifies being out of control, hello future rapists of America!)
Washing myself because I feel dirty on the inside
( Note: this referes to the Lady MacBeth syndrome, which likely can be cause by far more powerful factors than sex in elementary school children, for them sex is non existent biologically)
Not trusting people because they might want sex
( Note: healthy mistrust of strangers not encouraged ????)
Getting scared or upset when I think about sex
( Note: parental question only, they should be scared of sex, they can die from it!)
Having sex feelings in my body
(Note: at elementary school ages? This is truly pederastic
and sick!)
Can't stop thinking about sex
( Prebubescent sexual fixation??? Pederastic wishful thinking?)
Getting upset when people talk about sex
(Note: Children should be upset, its a parent child issue only, conversation about sex with any one but parents SHOULD make an elementary school child UPSET!!!)
THIS IS ALL REALLY SICK! NOT ONLY IS THE 9TH SCUM, WE NEED TO GET RID OF "JUDGE" Stephen Reinhardt. He should be impeached!
What a sick joke she is!!!!!!!!!
GREAT!!!! Let's do it!!!!
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.