Replies

This is the only part of this decision which is bad. Up to this point, the screamingly Democrat and liberal NJ SC got it right. This is the kind of decision which does not belong to the courts. Legislators are elected for this purpose, and can be defeated for reelection if the people do not agree with the policy decisions when they pass laws on any subject.

Since judges are not (normally) elected, and not subject to being defeated (never in partisan elections, if any), they should NOT make policy judgments like this.

Courts have no power to force a legislature to pass a particular text of a law. Unfortunately, some courts have taken upon themselves the "power" to "instruct" a legislature that it has a "duty to act" in a certain area. The legislature then acts, and the court then weighs the resulting law in another case.

Notice that the Supreme Court, also by a one-judge margin, "instructed" Congress that it had to act in the area of military tribunals for illegal combatants. In that case, Congress did act, and its resulting law will survive any subsequent challenge -- which is sure to come from the ACLU.

I don't agree with this latter point, but unfortunately there are ample prior cases in which both state and federal courts have done exactly this.

Congressman Billybob

Latest article: "Recess at Salisbury State"

Please see my most recent new statement on running for Congress, here.