Austria and Denmark Fear American-Style Supreme Court

Canada Free Press ^ | Saturday, January 14, 2006 | Paul Belien

[Anne_Conn]

While the US Senate is currently discussing Samuel Alito, George Bush’s pick for the Supreme Court, conservative European politicians are concerned about attempts by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to usurp legislative powers. Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schüssel’s recent criticism of the ECJ, the European Union's top court, was backed on Wednesday by Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Prime Minister of Denmark. Like Schüssel, Rasmussen wants the European Constitution to include an explicit restriction of the powers of the ECJ.

[mtbopfuyn]

Can anyone blame them for being afraid? Our own forefathers would be afraid.

[Brilliant]

I can see why. They need some mechanism to get rid of these fools. Maybe make it a 10 year appointment.

[Publius6961]

What a coincidence!

We're having the same problem in the U.S.
We can speculate as to why the Founding Fathers never saw the abuse by the judiciary as a threat.

Time to read the Federalist Papers again.
Surely, somewhere in there, there must be a red flag or two...

[Wonder Warthog]

"Time to read the Federalist Papers again."

You won't find it in the "Federalist" papers---those were written to justify the Constitution to the voters. If you want to find the prognostication of the FAULTS of the Constitution, you need to read the "Anti-Federalist" papers. Once you do, you will realize how prescient the Anti-Federalist criticisms of the Constitution were. Most of what they predicted, has, unfortunately, come to pass.

[rcocean]

There's plenty in the constitution to control the Federal Courts.

1) THe appellate and district courts are the creation of congress, their numbers, pay, and what they can rule on is all controlled congress. Congress have never had the guts to assert its power and tell the courts they can't rule on abortion or anything else.

2) Nowhere in the constitution is the numbers of SCOTUS members stated. Tomorrow the congress could appoint six new members to the court, or reduce the number to 6. There is no requirement a judge has to a lawyer.

3) Nowhere in the constitution is the SCOUTUS given the power to declare an act of congress unconstitutional, nor is there ANYWHERE and explicit statement that the Bill of Rights applies to the states. Thats why various states had Established churches prior to the civil war.

The congress has the power to rein in the court, but declines to use it.

[Hildy]

Really. When our Society took religion out of the equation, they had to fill that void with something else. My Dad called the Supreme Court the HIGH PRIESTS...no matter what we say we want...we're always looking for a higher power to look for. Unfortunately, this is not the right direction.

[hedgetrimmer]

Our forefathers would have impeached some of them, and they would never have left the business of running the schools and public institutions as we have, to the the radical left.