Posted on 08/06/2007 5:09:45 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
It’s always been thus: when the US Supreme Court makes a ruling, some people want to influence the court politically. When some of the New Deal was overturned, FDR tried his infamous “court packing” scheme to make sure his programs would pass muster with justices he’s loaded the court. When the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision was issued, people who disagreed with the Court’s rulings decided that the best way to counteract those rulings was by engaging in remarkable political attacks against the Justices with whom they disagreed. Thus, across the country, “Impeach Earl Warren!” signs sprang up like crabgrass attacking the Chief Justice who made the ruling in Brown possible and then-House Minority Leader Gerald Ford suggested that Justice William O. Douglas ought to have been impeached for having allowed excerpts from a book written by the Justice to appear alongside pornographic material.
But politicization of the judiciary is contrary both to Constitutional principle and -- at its most basic level -- contrary to the fundamental basis of democracy. If citizens want to protest the decisions of the high court, the proper response is to put forth an alternative and compelling theory of jurisprudence rather than engaging in campaign-style attacks on judges and Justices. Now that the Supreme Court appears to have taken something of a conservative turn, politicians and pundits on the other side of the philosophical divide are taking potshots at the institution of the Court and the Justices who serve on it.
Take Senator Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee who used to be its Chairman until the Democrats took control of the Senate. Senator Specter has decided to review the confirmation testimony of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito to see whether or not they lied about respecting precedent.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Once again, the Left shows what is at stake in 2008. Only the War on Terror is more important, and even then, it’s not hugely so.
But breaking up the 9th Circuit would be a threat to judicial independence and the system of checks and balances.
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.