The Reality of Using Judges to Grab Power
Fully 1/3 of the historic Nuremberg trials, held after the surrender of Germany at the end World War II, were spent trying the Judges who cleared a path for Hitler's most horrific abuses of power. These judges used their power re-interpreting the laws, and/or ignoring them all-together. The bottom line is that judges helped Hitler avoid completely the requirements of Germany's judicial system. These actions gave the Third Reich limitless power and voided all accountability to any law. For 60 years, in response to Fascist fears, the elite in the United States have echoed the refrain that it "...could never happen here.". It is happening here and it is worth taking note of the extreme differences each political party has on the role Judges should play in American governance.
Looking at the two primary parties in this nation, we can clearly see how each party views the role of federal Judges... specifically Supreme Court Judges. For the last 30 years, it has become clear that under the right circumstances and with the right set of judges a relatively small political movement could actually bypass the legislatures and the electorates of all 50 states. They could even bypass the Congress of the United States in order to impose their will on every American. This is exactly what the Nazi's did.
Battle-lines have now been drawn between those who want Judges to simply enforce the Constitution and those who want Judges to mold the Constitution through liberal interpretation. Obama has now nominated the first of perhaps three new judges in the next four years. This will have a profound impact on the future of the United States and the Constitution's separation of powers. Historically liberal judges are the one's who have an inflated view of the power of judges to improvise on Constitutional issues. Several times in recent history liberal judges have said publicly that the Constitution is not the only measure that federal judges should use in deciding constitutional questions. These judges believe that they should evaluate legal systems worldwide to decide the outcome and the current nominee thinks she should use her gender and racial experiences to "make policy". This is a very universalist attitude, but it is unconstitutional.
As the new nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, walks through the process of her nomination, it is important that our elected officials understand what can happen when a judiciary moves out of control. The German example is sobering, especially if you consider the fact that the Democrats control both houses of Congress and the White House. The constitution forbids judges from legislating from the bench, but with liberal judges enforcing the Constitution they could easily misuse this power. The Constitution requires that judges enforce the Constitutionality of the law or action of the government. Used properly, these powers should prevent a Hitler instead of supporting one.
Nominating judges that honor and respect the Constitution is very important. The reality is that Barack Obama has not proven he is willing to do that. Democrats support strongly the idea of using the courts to force social philosophies that they could not otherwise get approved using the democratic process available to them. An example is Roe v. Wade and how many believe that it should have been a states rights issue, not a federal one. The Nazi Brown-Shirts were in the exact same situation in 1939.
Comments
Post a Comment