Independent Judiciary?
I need to respond to some comments made by D.J. about my most recent terrorism post, but I saw this Reuters article on Yahoo and I just had to respond to it, because it shows a high lack of understanding by a Supreme Court Justice.
The article is about some comments made by Justice O'Connor in regard to the independence of the judiciary. According to O'Connor, there is an effort underfoot in the United States to try to reduce the independence of the judiciary. While that may be true to some extent, for some people, I think most simply want to limit the power of a runaway court system. A court system that in the past two months has turned the Fifth Amendment on its head in the Kelo decision, and has written a large part of Kansas' budget by judicial fiat. O'Connor apparently sees nothing wrong with this, even going so far as to try and make a positive example out of the Supreme Court's citing of "international law" in its ruling that capital punishment for juveniles is illegal. The fact that O'Connor even sees fit to bring this up is telling; she obviously does not get it. The use of "international law" is just one in a long laundry list of liberties the judiciary has taken with the Constitution, and with the judiciary's original purpose.
Most of us out here don't want to abolish the independent judiciary. We simply want it to do its job: interpret the laws of this country according to our Constitution. No more, no less.
The article is about some comments made by Justice O'Connor in regard to the independence of the judiciary. According to O'Connor, there is an effort underfoot in the United States to try to reduce the independence of the judiciary. While that may be true to some extent, for some people, I think most simply want to limit the power of a runaway court system. A court system that in the past two months has turned the Fifth Amendment on its head in the Kelo decision, and has written a large part of Kansas' budget by judicial fiat. O'Connor apparently sees nothing wrong with this, even going so far as to try and make a positive example out of the Supreme Court's citing of "international law" in its ruling that capital punishment for juveniles is illegal. The fact that O'Connor even sees fit to bring this up is telling; she obviously does not get it. The use of "international law" is just one in a long laundry list of liberties the judiciary has taken with the Constitution, and with the judiciary's original purpose.
Most of us out here don't want to abolish the independent judiciary. We simply want it to do its job: interpret the laws of this country according to our Constitution. No more, no less.
<< Home