Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1) For this reason impeachment was used whenever judges disregarded public interests, affrontedthewillofthepeople,orintroducedarbitrary powerbyseizingtherole of policymaker. Previous generations used this tool far more frequently than today's generation; and because the grounds for impeachment were deliberately kept broad, articlesofimpeachmenthavedescribedeverythingfromdrunkennessandprofanityto judicialhighhandednessandbriberyasreasonsforremovalfromthebench.(Sixtyone federaljudgesorSupremeCourtJustices havebeeninvestigated forimpeachment, of whomthirteenhavebeenimpeachedandsevenconvicted.) Today'sjudiciary,nothavingexperiencedanyseriousthreatofimpeachmentasjudgesin earliergenerations,repeatedlyflauntsitscontemptforthewillofthepeople.Itrecently hasoverturneddirectelectionsinWashington,NewYork,California,Arkansas,Texas, Missouri,etc.,simplybecauseitpreferredadifferentoutcome.Thisisnottosuggestthat theresultsofallcitizenelectionsarefinalandinfallible,foritisthedutyoftheCourtto protecttheConstitution.However,theaboveelectionsviolatedatmostthejudiciary's ideologicalleaningsratherthananymanifestprovisionoftheConstitution(e.g.,English as a State's official language, ending government assistance for illegal immigrants, enactingtermlimits,prohibitingphysicianassistedsuicides). ExamplesofJudicialAbuses Whilemostareawareofthe9thCircuit'srecentdecisionthatsayingunderGodinthe PledgeofAllegiancethreatensourAmericanformofgovernment,therearenumerous additionalexamples,somestaggeringlyunbelievable.Forexample,inJaneDoev.Santa Fe,afederaljudgeruledthatgraduationprayersmustnotincludeanymentionofJesus or other specific deities and that any student offering such a prayer would face immediatearrestanduptosixmonthsinjail.Thejudgethreatenedviolatorsbysaying theywouldwishtheyhaddiedasachildoncehiscourtfinishedwiththem. InaTexas countywhereconservatives narrowlywonmultipleseatsinanelection, a federaljudgereversedthatoutcomebyarbitrarilythrowingoutthe800votescastbyU.S. militarypersonnel,sayingtheyhadnorighttovoteinlocalelections.
AfederaljudgeinNashvillereviewstheverdictofanyjuryinTennesseethatawardsthe deathpenalty.Thisjudgehasopenlydeclaredhispersonaloppositiontothedeathpenalty and has setasideeveryjurydecisiononthis issue,despitetheConstitution's explicit languagetothecontrary.Thejudgeevenallowsnineyearstopass,onaverage,before overturningthejury'ssentence,thusdisregardingtheConstitution'sguaranteetoaspeedy trial. AftercitizensinastatewideelectionvoteddownaproposedtaxincreaseinMissouri,a federaljudge,indirectviolationofArticleIoftheConstitution,unilaterallysetasidethe electionresultsandinsteaddecreedthatthetaxbeleviedinordertofinancehisown personalplanforeducationintheState.Interestingly,thisjudge'splan(whichfundedthe Taj Majal of public education) proved to be a dismal failure at the continuing economicexpenseoftheentireState. Therearemanyotherexamples;today'sjudiciaryisnowsoarrogantthattheSupreme Court'sownJusticeshavedescribeditasasuperboardofeducationforeveryschool districtinthenation,asamateurpsychologistsonapsychojourney,andasanational theologyboard. TheSupremeCourtversusCongress EventhoughtheConstitutiongavethelawmakingpowerstotheCongress,courtshave becomethepredominantpolicymakingbodyinthenation.Infact,onpublictoursofthe SupremeCourt,oneoftenhearstheridiculousclaimthatthisisthebuildingfromwhich allthelawsinthelandemanate.TheSupremeCourt,fullybelievingitsownpropaganda, regularly strikes down or rewrites the laws of Congress to conform to its own predilectionsandedicts. Forexample,in1993,CongresspassedtheReligiousFreedomRestorationAct(RFRA)to correct an earlier Supreme Court decision that weakened a longstanding First Amendmentprotectionforreligiousgroups.ThatCongressionalactreinstitutedprotection declaringthatagovernmententitymustnotinterferewithareligiousbodyunlessithad acompellingstateinterestfordoingso.WhenaCatholicchurchinBoerne,Texas, soughttoaccommodateitsburgeoningmembershipbutwasdeniedabuildingpermitto expanditsfacilities,thechurchinvokedreliefunderRFRA,claimingthecityhadno compellingstateinterestindenyingthechurchexpansion.TheCourtruledotherwise, strikingdownCongress'attempttoprotectreligiousbodiesfromgovernmentintrusion. Whilemostdecriedthisdecisionforweakeningtherightsofreligiousbodies,therewasa fargreaterquestionatstake. CongressinvokedSection5oftheFourteenthAmendmentoftheConstitutioninpassing RFRAtoprotectreligiousfreedomsfromfurthergovernmentalencroachment.Yeteven thoughtheCongresshadactedonthepowerexplicitlygivenitintheConstitution,the
Court struck down the law, refusing to be corrected by Congress and warning that CongressshouldnotattempttocorrectaCourtruling.Significantly,Congresscitedthe ConstitutionasitsauthorityforpassingRFRA,buttheCourtdidnotcitetheConstitution asitsauthorityforstrikingRFRAdown.TheCourtinsteadpointedtoitsownprevious decisions,thuselevatingitsrulingshigherthantheConstitutionitself.Asitexplained, Any suggestion that Congress has a substantive, nonremedial power under the Fourteenth Amendment is not supported by our case law. The Court then rebuked Congress,warningthatitsjudicialedictsmustbetreatedwiththerespectduethem.In short,wetheCourtdemandthatyoutheCongressadheretoouropinionsregardlessof whattheConstitutionsays. Obviously, the Supreme Court considers both itself and its decisions supreme over Congress.However,theConstitutiondisagreesitdeliberatelyempowersCongresswith greater power. For example, the Constitution gives Congress the authority to set the salaries for judges, determine the size of the Judiciary, establish the scope of the Judiciary'sjurisdictionandthetypesofcaseswhichcomebeforeit.Furthermore,judges cannotservewithouttheapprovalofCongress,andCongressmayremovejudgeswith whomitisdissatisfied.ThesearejustsomeoftheconstitutionalarmsforCongress' powersofselfdefense(Federalist73,AlexanderHamilton). The Constitution clearly places many of the operations of the Judiciary under the oversightofCongressapowernotgrantedreciprocallytotheJudiciary.Thisismade clear in theFederalist Papers(described by James Madison as the most authentic expositionoftheheartofthefederalConstitution),whichconfirmthatsubjugatingthe JudiciarytoCongresswasdeliberateandintentional.Federalist#51declares: Thelegislativeauthoritynecessarilypredominates. Federalist#78thenproclaims: TheJudiciaryisbeyondcomparisontheweakestofthethreedepartmentsofpower. Furthermore,Federalist#49declaresthatCongressnottheCourtistheconfidential guardiansof[thepeople's]rightsandliberties.Why?BecausetheLegislaturenotthe unelectedjudiciaryisclosesttothepeopleandmostresponsivetothem.Infact,the Court'sownhistoryprovesthatitisnotaproficientguardianofthepeople'srights.For example,aftertheCivilWar,Congresspassedcivilrightslawsforbiddingsegregation, buttheCourtstruckdowntheselawsandinsteadinstitutedseparatebutequalinPlessey v.Ferguson.(WhiletheCourteventuallyendedthisracialsegregationinBrownv.Board of Education, that decision was merely the Court's reversal of its own segregation standardpreviouslyestablishedinPlessey.) Moreover,haditbeenuptotheCourt,slaverywouldhaveneverended:in1857,the
Courtdeclareditunconstitutionalfortheotherbranchestoendslaveryortofreeslaves. Fortunately,Congressignoredthatdecisionbydeclaringfreedomforslavesin1862and PresidentLincolnalsoignoredthatdecisionbyissuingtheEmancipationProclamation in1863.AllsubstantiveprogressincivilrightsaftertheCivilWarwasaccomplishedonly afterCongressusedArticleIII,Section2oftheConstitutiontoremoveReconstruction issuesfromtheCourt'sreach.Indeed,historydemonstratesthattheCourtislessthana faithful guardian of the people's rights, violating the people's liberties as often as it protectsthem.AsThomasJeffersonpointedout: Ourjudgesareashonestasothermenandnotmoreso.Theyhave,withothers,thesame passionsforparty,forpower,andtheprivilegeoftheircorps....andtheirpowerthe moredangerousastheyareinofficeforlifeandnotresponsible,astheotherfunctionaries are,totheelectivecontrol. Today,theCourtclaimsthatitistheonlybodycapableofinterpretingtheConstitution that Congress is incapable of determining constitutionality. However, the Founding Fathersvehementlydisagreed.Forexample,JamesMadisondeclared: [T]hemeaningoftheConstitutionmayaswellbeascertainedbytheLegislativeasbythe Judicialauthority. ConstitutionalConventiondelegateLutherMartinsimilarlyattested: Aknowledgeofmankindandoflegislativeaffairscannotbepresumedtobelongina higherdegreetotheJudgesthantotheLegislature. TheFoundersconsistentlyopposedtheCourtbeingthefinalwordonconstitutionality. Forexample,ThomasJeffersondeclared: [T]oconsiderthejudgesastheultimatearbitersofallconstitutionalquestions[is]avery dangerousdoctrine indeed,andonewhichwouldplaceusunderthedespotismofan oligarchy....TheConstitutionhaserectednosuchsingletribunal. HefurtherexplainedthatiftheCourtwasleftunchecked: TheConstitution...[wouldbe]amerethingofwaxinthehandsofthejudiciarywhich theymaytwistandshapeintoanyformtheyplease. AllowingtheCourttoenlargeitsownsphereofpowerbeyondwhattheConstitution authorizes, permitting the Court to usurp the powers of Congress, and tolerating the Courts'disregardofconstitutionalseparationofpowersmovesAmericaeverfurtherfrom being a representative republic and ever closer toward the oligarchy against which Jeffersonwarned.TheCourtmustberesistedintheseattempts.
Impeachment:TheFounders'Solution Asnotedearlier,judgesinpreviousgenerationswhousurpedpowersfromCongressor thepeople facedimpeachment. Buttoday's critics claim that theuseofimpeachment wouldeithermakethejudiciaryapoliticalbranch(asifitwerenotalreadyapolitical branch)orthat itwouldviolate theindependence ofthejudiciary. Yet,as Thomas Jeffersonsoaccuratelycautioned, Itshouldberememberedasanaxiomofeternaltruthinpoliticsthatwhateverpower... isindependentisabsolutealso....Independencecanbetrustednowherebutwiththe peopleinmass. NojudgeshouldeverbesoindependentthatheisunaccountabletotheCongress,and therebythepeople.AsJusticeJamesIredell(placedontheCourtbyPresidentGeorge Washington)soclearlyexplained: Everygovernmentrequiresit[impeachment].Everymanoughttobeamenableforhis conduct. Iredell further notedthat someofficials will behave themselves onlyunder the very terrorofpunishmentthatimpeachmentprovides.Recenteventssuggesthewasright. In 1996,sixmembers oftheSupreme Courtvoted tooverturn theColorado election forbiddingspecial(ratherthanjustequal)rightsforhomosexuals.Followingthatflagrant displayofcontemptforthewillofColoradovoters,therewasanationalcallforthe impeachmentofthosesixJustices.Afterthisclamorfortheirremoval,thosesamesix Justicessuddenlybecameardentdefendersofthepeople'selectionsandinasubsequent decisionunexpectedlyandunanimouslychastisedalowercourtthathadoverturned a statewide election in Arizona. (Interestingly, Thomas Jefferson on multiple occasions calledimpeachmentascarecrowsomethingusedtofrightenpredatorsandthethreat ofimpeachmentcertainlyhadthateffectontheSupremeCourt.) Similarly, after a federal judge overturned a binding referendum by the voters of California(Proposition209),nationalleaderscalledfortheimpeachmentofthatjudge. Later,the9thCircuitorderedtheresultsoftheelectionreinstatedandcriticizedthatjudge forignoringthewillofthepeople.Yet,thissame9thCircuitCourthaditselfshortly beforeoverturnedatleastthreesimilarelections.Whytheflipflop?Thescarecrowhad beenforcefullyraisedbyCongresstomakejudgesaccountablefortheirdecisionsby returningtotheoriginalconstitutionalusesofimpeachment. It is true that impeachment is a cumbersome process, and achieving a conviction is difficult.However,onmostoccasions,justthethreatofimpeachmentproducesresults.In fact, thereareseveralexamples offederaljudgescorrecting theirowndecisions after
hearingCongressionalcallsfortheirimpeachment;andanactualimpeachmentsendsan evenmorepowerfulmessagetoallotherwaywardleaningjudges. AlthoughCongressisultimatelyresponsibleforthedisciplineofjudges,fartoomanyof ourCongressmen(likefartoomanyofourcitizens)havenounderstandingoftheproper useofimpeachment.However,awisepoliticalaxiomdeclaresthatCongressseesthe lightwhenitfeelstheheat,andthisisespeciallytrueonthisissue.Ascitizens,weneed toeducateourselvesontheproperuseofjudicialimpeachment,andthenweneedto educateourRepresentatives,remindingthemoftheneedforjudicialreformandalerting them to those judges showing a pattern of abuse. The time for encouraging judicial accountabilityisonceagainripe.Thisisagoldenopportunityforcitizenstoweighinand makeadifference.