[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Why The Supreme Court Is Not Supreme [Article excerpts] Judicial activism occurs when judges write subjective policy preferences into the law rather than apply the law impartially according to its original meaning. The Heritage Foundation To vocal opponents of judicial activism, this comes as little surprise. The U.S. Supreme Court has suffered a major credibility blow in the wake of its politically motivated 5-4 Obergefell v. Hodges gay marriage opinion. In it, they presumed to do the impossible both redefine the age-old institution of natural marriage and to give this fictional definition precedence over freedoms actually enumerated in the Bill of Rights. According to Rasmussen, only 36 percent of Likely U.S. Voters still think the high court is doing a good or excellent job. As President Andrew Jackson famously quipped of a Supreme Court opinion he thought usurped his executive authority, [Chief Justice] John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it! Over the last few decades, the other two branches of government, the legislative and the executive, have, for some inexplicable reason, acquiesced to the notion of judicial supremacy a dangerously dominant concept that erroneously regards the United States Supreme Court as the final arbiter of all things public policy. If this is so, then these nine unelected lawyers are ultimately unaccountable to anyone or anything, and the other two branches of government are but toothless figurehead bodies merely spinning their wheels while spending our dollars. This flies in the face of the framers intent. Its also the very unfortunate reality under which we live. It is fully within the constitutional authority of the other two branches of government to rein in these judges gone wild. Article III, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the authority to check judicial activism, up to and including when justices illegitimately legislate from the bench: [T]he Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make. Congress, from a regulatory standpoint, has the absolute constitutional authority to smack down this rogue Supreme Court. Unfortunately, to date, it has either been unwilling or unable to do so. halt this judicial imperialism. In the vast majority of their writings the Founding Fathers were explicit that the judicial branch of government is effectively the weakest of the three. Regrettably, such is not the case with todays modern misapplication. Americans currently live under what is, for all intents and purposes, a counter-constitutional judiciocracy led by nine unelected, unaccountable, black-robed autocrats. No, five extremist lawyers dont get to decide the law of the land. Only the legislature can do that. The high court merely issues opinions. And then the other two branches decide what, if anything, to do with them. The Declaration of Independence acknowledges that true rights are God-given and unalienable. Religious free exercise is sacrosanct. Gay marriage is pretend. And the Supreme Court is not the Supreme Being. Matt Barber is founder and editor-in chief of BarbWire.com. He is an author, columnist, cultural analyst and an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. Poster Comment: Some links at the source. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
[Register]
|