War on th Judiciary
stcynic | October 18, 2006While conservatives are busy saying, "Attacks on judicial independence? What attacks on judicial independence?", South Dakota has an amendment on the ballot this year allowing people to sue judges for making decisions they don't like. And that's not the half of it. The LA Times reports:
South Dakota's Amendment E would have the most sweeping effect; it has drawn opposition from conservatives and liberals -- including, in a rare show of unanimity, every member of the state Legislature.
Under the amendment judges in the state could lose their jobs or assets if citizens disliked how they…
stcynic | October 5, 2006Judge William Pryor has an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal responding to recent arguments from Justice O'Connor concerning attacks on the judiciary (and perhaps to Judge Jones from the Dover trial as well, he has been saying much the same thing O'Connor has in speeches recently). Orin Kerr thinks Pryor got it "about right", but I think he didn't even begin to cover the serious concerns raised by the attacks on judicial independence over the last few years. He makes three arguments. The first:
Contemporary criticisms of the judiciary are relatively mild. To charge that the current…
stcynic | August 16, 2006Susan Jacoby has a pretty good essay at TomPaine.com about anti-judicial rhetoric and how it is damaging our system of law. Part of the essay focuses on Judge Jones and quotes a particularly wise statement from him:
"But I submit to you that as citizens, we do not want and cannot possibly have a judiciary which operates according to the polls, or one which rules based on who appointed us or according to the popular will of the country at any given moment in time."
Hear, hear. The courts were designed specifically not to be beholded to popular opinion. The founders saw that as one of the most…
stcynic | June 5, 2006One of the most frightening trends of the last few years is the alarming increase in anti-judicial rhetoric from the right. The courts, of course, are a convenient whipping boy for politicians who have to manipulate the populace to get elected to office. The courts are often in the position of having to overturn legislation that is popular and that gives rise to the familiar rhetoric about "unelected judges" violating "the will of the people". Of course, such rhetoric is highly selective. The right throws a hissy fit whenever a court overturns legislation they support, but when legislation is…
stcynic | May 12, 2006Rhetorical bombs thrown at courts and judges are a common theme on the right and have been for quite some time. Any judge who rules against them is branded an "activist judge" seeking to impose "judicial tyranny". We hear constant screeds against "unelected judges" who "subvert the will of the people" (curiously, and tellingly, they were dead silent when the courts struck down California's medical marijuana law, passed by popular referendum, or when they struck down Oregon's assisted suicide law, passed twice by popular referendum).
Religious right groups have held conferences to do nothing…