A long time ago, judges and justices held a belief that their purview had fairly narrow limits. Issues that the legislative branch could handle were generally left to Congress or the states. They understood that in a republic such as ours, the judicial branch had to remain restrained and that the elected officials must make the decisions. Only in egregious situations, such as the severe and unwarranted violation of civil rights, should courts intervene.
That was generations ago. Elena Kagan represents only the latest of an army of activist judges and justices. They believe that they shape the law as opposed to an earlier time when courts saw themselves as restrained by it. A court decision can affect the lives of millions and never reach the desk of someone elected by the people.
This encourages "legislation by lawsuit." If legislatures will not act on an issue, find a court that is friendly to the issue and file suit. You can get products banned from the market, tourists banned from beaches, and beneficial state laws blocked. A federal court last week issued an injunction against Arizona's law which merely asks individuals involved in traffic stops or arrests to prove their identity. Last I checked, we all had to do that anyway. Down in North Carolina, local communities fear that special interest group lawsuits will close beaches that bring millions in revenue to the eastern part of that state. It only takes one environmental kook judge to ruin it for everyone.
We need restrained government and we need restrained judges.
No comments:
Post a Comment