Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republicans Step Up Attacks on Judiciary
Reuters ^ | 4/8/05 | Alan Elsner

Posted on 04/09/2005 5:49:59 PM PDT by Crackingham

Christian conservatives, led by some top Republicans, are stepping up their assault on the U.S. judiciary in response to the Terri Schiavo case, saying judges are attacking religion and must be reined in. At a conference on Thursday and Friday organized by the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration, an umbrella group bringing together many religious conservative organizations, prominent Republicans joined with activists to assault what they term "judicial activism."

House of Representatives Majority Leader Tom DeLay, under fire for his use of campaign dollars and other ethical problems, addressed the conference in a videotaped message on Thursday in which he denounced a "judiciary run amok."

"Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric," the Texas Republican told the conference, entitled "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith."

President Bush, asked about DeLay's comments, said on Friday: "I believe in an independent judiciary. I believe in proper checks and balances. And we'll continue to put judges on the bench who strictly and faithfully interpret the Constitution."

Conservatives including DeLay have intensified their criticism of judges in the aftermath of the Schiavo case. Several at the conference said the Florida woman who died last week, 13 days after her feeding tube was removed, was a victim of "judicial murder."

"I believe the judicial branch of our government has overstepped its authority on countless occasions, overturning and, in some cases, ignoring the legitimate will of the people," said DeLay, who was unable to attend the conference because he was in Rome for Pope John Paul II's funeral.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: judeochristian; judicialtyranny; judiciary; tomdelay

1 posted on 04/09/2005 5:49:59 PM PDT by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Go get 'em, Mr. Delay. My check is on the way.


2 posted on 04/09/2005 5:51:59 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

We are not "assaulting" the judiciary, we are reforming it.


3 posted on 04/09/2005 5:53:59 PM PDT by jwalburg (Nothing opens the closed minds of academic administrators like a pocketbook snapping shut - Williams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

This is why we elected them, they better deliver.


4 posted on 04/09/2005 5:54:07 PM PDT by John Lenin (Keep your friends close, your enemies closer, and use up Their money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
We can always count on Reuters for objective, honest journalism.

/s

5 posted on 04/09/2005 5:55:58 PM PDT by Ed_in_NJ (Who killed Suzanne Coleman?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
House of Representatives Majority Leader Tom DeLay, under fire for his use of campaign dollars and other ethical problems, addressed the conference in a videotaped message on Thursday in which he denounced a "judiciary run amok."

The New York Times, The Washington Post, moveon.org, & George Soros decided to place yet another big bet using what remains of their clout after a failed 2004 election gambit to get Bush. news.google.com may provide us with a useful adhoc metric to measure Soros' clout in attracting fellow travelers from MSM willing to double down by going out on a limb with him yet again.

Update: Interesting how the quantity of stories that parrot Soros' propaganda actually dropped this morning. Perhaps google mitotically split the orginal story thread into several threads. Or maybe google removed virtual duplicates to mitigate a process known to me as google fluffing whereby an member of MSM keeps publishing the same story with minor changes, which sometimes builds up a story thread up until it appears on the front page of google news.

04/07/2005 8:59:43 AM MDT:

 
 News  Results 1 - 30 of about 269 related articles. Search took 0.07 seconds. 

  


04/07/2005 9:08:45 PM MDT:
 
 News  Results 1 - 30 of about 298 related articles. Search took 0.11 seconds.    


04/08/2005 8:44:33 AM MDT:
 
 News  Results 1 - 30 of about 274 related articles. Search took 0.19 seconds.    


04/08/2005 11:50:40 PM MDT:
 
 News  Results 1 - 30 of about 277 related articles. Search took 0.06 seconds.    


04/09/2005 6:53:50 PM MDT:
 
 News  Results 1 - 30 of about 179 related articles. Search took 0.07 seconds.    

6 posted on 04/09/2005 5:56:53 PM PDT by Milhous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

Every time a body is found after an Amber alert or some vicious perp is released, we should remember that Dems and Rinos have weakened the whole judicial system and that it matters who is at the top levels.


7 posted on 04/09/2005 5:57:11 PM PDT by jwalburg (Nothing opens the closed minds of academic administrators like a pocketbook snapping shut - Williams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
I believe the judicial branch of our government has overstepped its authority on countless occasions, overturning and, in some cases, ignoring the legitimate will of the people," said DeLay,

Exactly! It's NOT just about Christianity, it's about their arrogance, and their legislating from the bench. It's about their disregard for the Constitution! The "life time appointment" law needs to be changed. It has lead to tyranny! Some of those old goats have lost their minds, and need to be retired.

8 posted on 04/09/2005 5:57:58 PM PDT by NRA2BFree (Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Confronting the Judicial War on Faith The Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration holds a conference on "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith." 4/7/2005: WASHINGTON, DC: 2 hr. 55 min.

WATCH THE 3 HOUR CONFERENCE....EXTREMELY INTERESTING....ESPECIALLY HERB TITUS....

9 posted on 04/09/2005 5:59:33 PM PDT by shield (The Greatest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God!!!! by Dr. H. Ross, Astrophysicist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Watched part of the meeting on CSpan. I see Reuters reporter made everyone Christian, which I'm sure will come to quite a surprise to the Jewish participants.

http://www.stopactivistjudges.org/


10 posted on 04/09/2005 5:59:59 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham; Texas Eagle; jwalburg; John Lenin; Ed_in_NJ
"Republicans Step Up Attacks on Judiciary"

Translation: Republicans seek to preserve the Constitution, even though it includes protecting stupefyingly brain dead news organizations like rooters.

11 posted on 04/09/2005 6:00:10 PM PDT by Enterprise (Abortion and "euthanasia" - the twin destroyers of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
From an inconvenient document commonly known as The Constitution of The United States of America.

Article. III.
Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

A question from the back of the class: If Congress may from time to time ordain and establish inferior courts (heh, heh), does this not imply that Congress may from time to time DIS-establish and UN-ordain said courts?

12 posted on 04/09/2005 6:01:36 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
I prefer to say we would like to return the runaway judiciary back onto the tracks.
13 posted on 04/09/2005 6:02:07 PM PDT by b4its2late (Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants to see us happy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Sic 'em, you no-good bastards. We put you there to define the will of the people, not the 'anointed' judicial royalty. We decide what is legal/illegal, moral/immoral, and right/wrong - and we send you to The Swamp to make that The Law Of The Land. You are starting - slowly, almost imperceptibly, but starting nonetheless - to realize that Thall Shalt Not F**k Thy Consituency, lest we rise up and smite yo' ass.


14 posted on 04/09/2005 6:02:55 PM PDT by Viking2002 (Let's get the Insurrection started, already..............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree
The issue that really needs to be addressed and which many here tend to overlook is whether or not we have a "right to die".

Do we have a "right to die"?

15 posted on 04/09/2005 6:03:48 PM PDT by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Christian conservatives, led by some top Republicans, are stepping up their assault on the U.S. judiciary in response to the Terri Schiavo case, saying judges are attacking religion and must be reined in.

Reuters, your bias is blatant........it's more than that.

Judges attack religion, the Constitution, the separation of powers; they rule by fiat and whim. They have become a bunch of renegades who want to impose their blurred vision on the rest of us.

16 posted on 04/09/2005 6:15:42 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse (unite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Ahhhh...as usual, the biased headline by the ROOTER REUTERS...clymers!!


17 posted on 04/09/2005 6:16:10 PM PDT by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia; tutstar; STARWISE; russesjunjee; wildandcrazyrussian; pc93; Lesforlife

Ping. Bad judges should be ousted from the bench and sent to jail if they are GUILTY AS CHARGED.


18 posted on 04/09/2005 6:18:40 PM PDT by floriduh voter (www.theempirejournal.com Demand the Impeachment of Judge Greer...No More!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halls

PING.


19 posted on 04/09/2005 6:18:59 PM PDT by floriduh voter (www.theempirejournal.com Demand the Impeachment of Judge Greer...No More!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Hey when the heat is on and frnakly you're beginning to look like the dems prior to the Contract in 94, find someone to demonize like you did in the late 80's and early 90's.


20 posted on 04/09/2005 6:20:32 PM PDT by joesbucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
I have wondered the same. If Congress gets sufficiently angry, simply dis-ordain them from time to time. And as I read this, it is CONGRESS that has the say in the establishment or dis-establishment of Federal the courts, (other than the Supreme Court) not the President.
21 posted on 04/09/2005 6:25:39 PM PDT by Enterprise (Abortion and "euthanasia" - the twin destroyers of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

Yes.

And Congress ALSO has the power to prevent the Federal Courts from reviewing any law it passes, simply by saying so in the text of the law.

Therefore, Congress could simply pass a Federal law prohibiting same-sex marriage and it would NOT be reviewable by the Federal Courts.

However, House Judiciary Chair Sensenbrenner would prefer that marriage remain a State issue.


22 posted on 04/09/2005 6:26:13 PM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Viking2002

I rather like you style--but prefer a .30-06 to the spear.


23 posted on 04/09/2005 6:26:55 PM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
Which brings to mind another "nuclear" option. The Republicans in Congress should tell the Democrats that if they continue to "filibuster" the nominations, they will simply dis-ordain the Federal Courts. Guess who go nuclear THEN!
24 posted on 04/09/2005 6:30:11 PM PDT by Enterprise (Abortion and "euthanasia" - the twin destroyers of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
Therefore, Congress could simply pass a Federal law prohibiting same-sex marriage and it would NOT be reviewable by the Federal Courts.

In such a case, it also wouldn't be enforceable by those same courts, so it'd be pretty much a dead letter.

25 posted on 04/09/2005 6:55:33 PM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: expatguy
The issue that really needs to be addressed and which many here tend to overlook is whether or not we have a "right to die".

I believe the emphasis should be put on people's "right to live." Under no circumstances should anyone who does not have a signed, notarized statemant that they want to die, be put to death. If Michael would have had to prove it by producing a notarized will, Terri would still be alive today.

26 posted on 04/09/2005 7:16:23 PM PDT by NRA2BFree (Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: floriduh voter

I agree, they should be arressted from the bench for not following the Constitution of this country and go to jail for murderous actions!!!


27 posted on 04/09/2005 7:27:19 PM PDT by Halls
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree

I thought our right to live was inherent. I now realize--I have been fooled. It really is about the budget and the Dems are going to fix healthcare and cram pro-life back at the Republicans while they stand by and say pro-life, pro-life but NO I will not pay for it.


28 posted on 04/09/2005 7:32:54 PM PDT by Snoopers-868th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

This what they should have been doing all along.


29 posted on 04/09/2005 7:39:15 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree; Halls; Trout-Mouth; inquest; All
"...Under no circumstances should anyone who does not have a signed, notarized statemant that they want to die, be put to death...[sic]

Which comes back once again to my original question:

Do we have a constitutional "right to die"?

If you think that we do, then you have been suckered into the secularist's agenda.

My thoughts are as follows:

Do we have a "right to die"?

The dilemma that we are now faced with and sadly brought on by our nation's courts is multi-faceted. First, the determination of who exactly has a "life not worthy of living" now becomes entirely subjective. Not only from individual to individual and from state to state, but from nation to nation as well.

The dangerously seductive arguement that many Americans seem to have unwittingly accepted is that we as individuals have a constitutional "right to die". Simply put, we don't.

Our nation's Supreme Court seems to think that the "right to die" is a liberty protected by the Due Process Clause. It may in fact be a liberty, but it is not a fundamental or natural right. While the Ninth Amendment might seem to imply that we do in fact have additional fundamental or natural rights, what the court fails to recognize is that, it is not with their power to grant us those additional rights. Those fundamental rights are God given rights, natural rights, i.e., rights we possess by nature and not by law. To give an analogy, I have a right to go to Heaven, it is a liberty that I possess and yet the court cannot grant me that right. Likewise, the court cannot grant me the "right to die", only God can, and only when he chooses.

The courts now find themselves in a dilemma now by basing all their current and future judgements for other cases on a mistake made back in 1990 where our court played God and granted a "right" that they actually had no power to grant. The "right to die".

Throughout this recent case, the arguement accepted by the court seems to have centered on "This was Terri's wish." and "This is what Terri would have wanted." Im sure Terri like many of us also wants to go to Heaven.

Very well then, if the court feels that Terri can choose that she does not want to live her life based on her medical condition, then how can the same court deny a person who makes the choice i.e. the liberty that they don't want to live their life as a prisoner, as a drug addict, as a sick person, as a disabled or retarded person, as an only child, or as an ugly person, the list goes on. Surely if the court feels that the "right to die" is a liberty protected by the Due Process Clause then anyone at anytime can take their own life and choose the time of their death.

Secondly, and yet even more sinister, who (other than the individual concerned) has the right to decide in cases such as this? The parents, guardian, husband/wife or the State?

30 posted on 04/09/2005 7:44:23 PM PDT by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

Yes. It also means that Congress can set terms of service and limit jurisdiction.


31 posted on 04/09/2005 8:17:23 PM PDT by nonliberal (Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Quite a brazen hit piece.
"Tom DeLay Under-fire-for-his-use-of-campaign-dollars-and-other-ethical-problems."
What is that, his full Indian name?


32 posted on 04/09/2005 10:51:28 PM PDT by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

I saw this article on a blog. We all die but we do not have a right to take someone else's life. Suicide by one's own hand is uncontrollable.


33 posted on 04/09/2005 11:02:22 PM PDT by Snoopers-868th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Trout-Mouth
That would have been mine ;-)

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

34 posted on 04/09/2005 11:05:47 PM PDT by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

Did you read the comments to your article? I was astonished.


35 posted on 04/09/2005 11:30:48 PM PDT by Snoopers-868th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

The Dems and the ACLU having been assulting judges for years. Unless they are Left-Wing.


36 posted on 04/09/2005 11:38:50 PM PDT by Brimack34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trout-Mouth

On which essay?


37 posted on 04/09/2005 11:41:42 PM PDT by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

I doubt that he even knows any Republicans or Conservatives. It is like saying "the American People" want __________. Since when does he know what "the American People" want?! It's the same crap the Clintons pulled when he was being IMPEACHED!

38 posted on 04/09/2005 11:58:26 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
House of Representatives Majority Leader Tom DeLay, under fire for his use of campaign dollars and other ethical problems

News at 6.... The adulterous, coke-laden, traitorous and impeached former POTUS, Bill Clinton, will give an exclusive interview regarding all the mysterious deaths surrounding his career, plus the sell-out of our national security to the Chinese, for political dollars..

39 posted on 04/10/2005 4:28:47 AM PDT by LaineyDee (Don't mess with Texas .....wimmen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseofTexas

Two years ago at my daughter's Christmas party in Houston we met her new neighbors, both Reuter's employees, that she had invited as a courtesy. Last year they put up a big Kerry-Edwards on their lawn. Needless to say they weren't invited to my daughter's Christmas party!


40 posted on 04/10/2005 5:17:55 AM PDT by RightWingConspirator (Glad that Ted the Boorish Drunk, Hitlery the Witch and John Fonda/Fraud Kerry are not my senators.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
A question from the back of the class: If Congress may from time to time ordain and establish inferior courts (heh, heh), does this not imply that Congress may from time to time DIS-establish and UN-ordain said courts?

As you already have been advised the answer is ...YES

However, what's not been noted is that's it's already been done. Here's a little something on the Federal Courts in 'our' favorite state, CA, the perennial land of fruits and nuts (Freepers excluded)

U.S. District Courts of California, Legislative history
  • March 2, 1855 -- 10 Stat. 631
    This act established the U.S. Circuit Court for the California Circuit and repealed the authority of the California district courts to exercise the trial jurisdiction of a U.S. circuit court, although they continued to exercise appellate jurisdiction in certain cases involving land claims.

  • March 3, 1863 -- 12 Stat. 794
    This act abolished the California Circuit, established a Tenth Circuit consisting of the judicial districts of California and Oregon, and eliminated the remaining appellate jurisdiction of the district courts of California.

There's much more but you get the idea. It later goes on as to the establishment of the 9th Circus, oops 9th Circuit.

Also in 1801 the outgoing Federalists in Congress reorganized the Federal Courts in their favor (allegedly) and then within thirteen months, a new Congress with a majority of Jeffersonian Republicans repealed the controversial Judiciary Act of 1801 and reorganized the federal court system in the Judiciary Act of 1802, which preserved the system of six numbered circuits but abolished the separate judgeships.

And lastly we have President Andy Jackson who said (allegedly) upon hearing of an 'unfavorable' ruling by Chief Justice John Marshall; "John Marshall has made his decision - now let him enforce it!"

So as you see the Federal Courts are not all powerful, Congress and "us" have let them believe they are.

41 posted on 04/10/2005 6:12:56 AM PDT by Condor51 (Leftists are moral and intellectual parasites - Standing Wolf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

The smoke is getting pretty intense.

The falmes are bound to appear pretty soon. Roasted rat stinks pretty bad but its got to be done.


42 posted on 04/10/2005 6:14:48 AM PDT by bert (Peace is only halftime !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
I saw this on Drudge.

Very Sick - They must be getting nerveous. Keep it up Tom Delay

43 posted on 04/11/2005 9:59:11 AM PDT by GrandmaC (http://home.earthlink.net/~grandmac2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson