On the Separation of Powers - Part 1
"HARRI, LET ME POINT SOMETHING OUT TO YOU...SEE THAT UP THERE?
THAT'S WHERE WE PUT PEOPLE WHO LACK LOYALTY."
All the angst and back and forth and hem and haw and yee and yaw about Supreme Court nominations loses sight of a critical point. Which Rep. Ron Paul didn't miss (of course).
His column (click it and read it. go on. do it.) explains simple truths which we all knew at one point (at least for the civics test in 8th grade). Congress has the power to grant (or withhold) the federal courts' jurisdiction. Congress is comprised of representatives elected by we, the people.
Even this anti-government guy acknowledges (or believes, anyway) that if enough voters expressed enough opinions to enough elected representatives enough laws could be passed to render the U.S. Supreme Court fairly unimportant. I don't know whether this would be good, but it is certainly something to keep in mind. Remember, politicians like being politicians (the pay is decent and the perquisites of office make it worthwhile to keep the job). So it might even be possible to achieve political goals through the political process rather than through press conferences and non-profit interest group efforts. I'm just saying.
Key sentences from the Ron Paul article:
- Since many citizens lack basic knowledge of our Constitution and federalist system, they are easily manipulated by media and academic elites who tell them that judges are the absolute and final arbiters of US law. But the Supreme Court is not supreme over the other branches of government; it is supreme only over lower federal courts. If Americans wish to be free of judicial tyranny, they must at least develop basic knowledge of the judicial role in our republican government. The present state of affairs is a direct result of our collective ignorance.
CAVEAT:
I think I heard new Chief Justice Roberts say during his nomination hearings at the Senate that he's not entirely sure Ron Paul's position on this matter is correct. I also recall being stunned but not surprised. It's logical for an aspirant to the Supreme Court to be reluctant to passively agree that the perks of his goal can be taken away by the "yeas" and "nays" of the rabble in the elected official ranks. Fans of Marbury v. Madison know what Justice Roberts may have had in mind; that Chief Justice Marshall sure was a clever one for understanding that going last may be more important than being right.
(Disclaimer - regarding the above, I earned a C- in Constitutional Law during law school, so I am scarcely qualified to comment on these topics. That's blogging for you. You get what you pay for.)
posted by garrett @ 4:09 PM
7 Comments:
Well, I'm certainly no fan of current administration policies, but I don't think I can agree that President Bush is an un-intelligent person.
In this column Gary North makes the following observations on this topic:
"The animated cartoon, This Land, has Kerry saying what Bush's critics have long said: he is stupid. He lacks a brain. If the viewers didn't suspect that this is true, the cartoon would not be funny.
Laugh it up, viewers! By the way, viewers, did you get into Yale? Bush did. He graduated, too. Then he went to Harvard Business School, from which he also graduated. He drank his way through both institutions. He was not an academic grind. He did it in his spare time.
Yet when we listen to Bush, he does not sound impressive. He mangles the English language.
This may be genetic. His father went through Yale in three years and graduated Phi Beta Kappa. Yet whenever he spoke, it was like a man tripping over his tongue.
Neither Bush possesses the rhetorical ability of a graduate of unheralded Eureka College, Ronald Reagan. I doubt that Reagan would have made Phi Beta Kappa at Yale."
FWIW.
If only Ron Paul was nominated.
I can dream, can't I?
You, me, and the guy that wrote Ron Paul for President would be elated. If Ron Paul was on the ballot, I would vote.
Shiner 96
Bill Brasky is a son of a bitch
Nice try, omapcw1. I appreciate your clarification, but must remind you that in your original post you clearly asserted that future Justice Piers could easily find more intelligent people than Bush at a McDonald's or dry cleaners. That might be true, but I am quite comfortable believing you meant by that remark to say Bush is un-intelligent.
Oh, and you are smoking hot.
I got a C- in Con Law too!
Post a Comment
<< Home