Judges Step out of Bounds
Monday, April 11, 2005
By: Rick Scarborough
Commentary Published by USA Today
Last week, the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration held a conference, "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith," which proposed bold but overdue reforms.
Some have accused us of being sore losers and attacking judges because we're unhappy with the outcome of specific cases, such as the starving death of Terri Schiavo. This is both inaccurate and unfair.
We are defending the Constitution and liberty. By regularly exceeding their constitutional authority — in effect, legislating from the bench — liberal judges are destroying representative government.
An amendment to the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the states. But the Supreme Court has taken to routinely "amending" the Constitution to suit the whims of a shifting majority of justices, often with dire consequences.
The Constitution vests legislative authority in Congress. Yet, under the guise of interpreting the Constitution, judges have:
Created out of thin air an unlimited right to abortion, including the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion.
Outlawed religious expression in public schools and required removal of the Ten Commandments from public places.
Tried to take "one nation under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Struck down Texas' sodomy law, causing Justice Antonin Scalia to note that the court "has taken sides in the culture war."
Attempted to redefine marriage over the protests of the American people.
And now, Supreme Court justices are undermining our sovereignty by turning to foreign law for precedents in deciding whether minors can be subject to the death penalty.
In the face of this unprecedented assault on morality, democracy and constitutional separation of powers, we are proposing certain remedies — including impeachment and the withdrawal of jurisdiction to hear certain cases. All are constitutional.
In an 1820 letter, Thomas Jefferson wrote that judges "seem to see (themselves) as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under an oligarchy." Was Jefferson attacking an independent judiciary, as some now accuse Rep. Tom DeLay and Sen. John Cornyn of doing?
An independent judiciary does not mean an unaccountable judiciary.