Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
GOP Constitutional Ignorance Inspires A Radical Attack On The Judiciary
Democracy has worked in America for over two-hundred years because the federal judiciary has the ability to check legislation for constitutionality and serves as a protection against Congressional and presidential overreach. Perhaps the federal courts do not always side with popular opinion, or the will of the people, but they do provide a measure of continuity based on the Constitution. There is reason to be concerned that democracy is in jeopardy if Republicans seeking the nomination for the presidency ever reach the White House because three of the contenders have made statements that threaten the federal judiciary and by extension, the Constitution and nature of America’s government.
Conservatives have assailed “Liberal activist judges” since Richard Nixon was president, but three of the Republican candidates have gone beyond rhetoric and suggested radical policies that portend disaster for democracy. Statements from Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum should engender outrage and criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike for their dictatorial tendencies and extreme anti-Constitutional nature. The three candidates do a disservice to Americans who may be as ignorant of the Constitution as the Republican, would-be dictators. It is doubtful that any president or serious candidate for president has ever defied a federal judge’s ruling, but Perry, Gingrich, and Santorum are promising a frightening scenario that rejects the notion of judicial independence.
It is not entirely clear if Republicans have a firm grasp on the Constitution or American history, but their mean-spirited ignorance of the country’s main document is shocking, if not pure evil. There are reasons federal judges receive lifetime appointments, and none is so crucial as a judge serving for life is not inclined to make critical decisions based on public opinion that may win, or lose an election or assignment to a federal court. Instead of pleasing voters and politicians, federal judges must base decisions on their understanding of the Constitution whether their opinions are popular or not.
In November, Rick Perry said if he was elected as president, federal judges would not receive lifetime appointments to the bench. Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution clearly states that Supreme Court Justices and lower federal court’s judges are appointed to have lifetime tenure unless they are impeached and removed from office. Either Perry is ignorant of the Constitution or believes that as president he will have dictatorial powers to unilaterally change the Constitution based on his flawed understanding of presidential powers that are clearly defined in the Constitution. Regardless of Perry’s dysfunction, his statements contribute to the miseducation of an already ignorant Republican voting base that may believe, like Perry, that a president can issue edicts that are contrary to the rule of law.
Newt Gingrich claims to be the intelligent candidate, but his toxic rhetoric against the federal judiciary displays ignorance, and worse; a frightening contradiction of the Constitution’s separation of powers. Gingrich said he would defy Supreme Court decisions if he disagreed with them and that the concept of judicial review is “grossly overstated.” Gingrich said the courts are forcing a constitutional crisis with their “arrogant overreach” and called for impeaching judges, abolishing judgeships, and eliminating courts whose rulings he dislikes and disagrees with. Gingrich has accused federal judges of being “anti-American” and “grotesquely dictatorial” for imposing “elitist opinions” based on Liberal bias. What makes Gingrich’s comments ultra-outrageous is the fact that the Supreme Court’s conservative majority have ruled in Republican’s favor consistently starting with their gift of the presidency to George W. Bush. It is also curious that Gingrich’s anti-judicial rhetoric is aimed at judges on the High Court and lower federal courts who were appointed by Republican presidents.
Rick Santorum joined Gingrich in discussing abolishing the Federal Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Santorum said he would “sign a bill tomorrow to eliminate the 9th Circuit,” and added, “That court is rogue. It’s a pox on the western part of our country.” Looking back over recent presidential primaries and nominees, it is evident that no Republican or Democratic presidential aspirant has ever made such overtures like Gingrich, Perry , or Santorum. Gingrich explicitly suggested possible impeachment of judges that is contrary to the Constitution that only allows impeachment for “treason, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors;” not if an opinion is unpopular and contrary to the president’s beliefs.
Throughout our nation’s history, the power of federal courts to declare executive and legislative acts unconstitutional has never been questioned and in the Marbury v. Madison decision in 1803, the court declared that, “it is the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is;” not the president or Congress. The Republican candidates are not only frightening, but they reject the notion of judicial independence that serves as the last line of defense to keep presidents and Congress honest in following the Constitution.
What these Republicans are suggesting is that a president can defy the rule of law and the judiciary, reject judicial review to enforce the Constitution, and grant supreme power to the president to abolish courts, judges, and decisions they disagree with. The Republicans are not just spouting inflammatory rhetoric, but making threats that will finally, once and for all time, end Democracy in America. The next logical step after abolishing non-compliant courts is eliminating Congress and appointing themselves as supreme ruler for life. It may sound unreal and outrageous, but without a judiciary to decide that laws, executive branch decisions, or presidential edicts are either allowable or not under the Constitution, then the Constitution itself will be null and void and the only rule of law rests with the self-appointed, lifetime serving, supreme leader in the guise of a Republican president.
These are dark days for America that major candidates for the Republican nomination for the presidency have announced in advance that under their administration, the Constitution is worthless and a president is dictator. The prescient question is; where is the media outrage at these statements of extremist conservatives and why are main-stream Republicans silent when the first judges to be abolished and impeached are certainly conservatives? The answer, like a Republican presidency, is just too frightening to contemplate.
America’s most important legal document is being perverted by Republicans in the form of a new meme that ...
Newt Gingrich unveiled his strategy to combat his slide in the polls today on Face The Nation. He is goi ...
There are some politicians who are so out of touch with reality that any sane person with more than a pe ...
Republican Governor Phil Bryant of Mississippi is calling for an unconstitutional remedy for what he see ...
Article Two of the United States Constitution says that Supreme Court justices, once appointed by the Pr ...
Shawn
Dec. 26th, 2011 at 10:12 am
The GOP is being run by authoritarians. Authoritarians believe that they are doing god’s will, even if billions of people get hurt. If god did want these people hurt, then it would somehow prevent them from doing so. They also believe that if something didn’t work, it’s because they weren’t trying hard enough. After all, they are god’s gift to the world, so anything they think up is god’s will and if it fails, they have to try even harder next time.
Moral of the story: don’t give power to authoritarians. They will just screw things up until you take it away from them.
Harold Huff
Dec. 26th, 2011 at 10:11 pm
You are exactly correct Shawn. Fundamentally they believe in the principle that has ruledmankind throughout the vast majority of our history and across virtually all theoretical divisions. Might makes right, or sometimes called the Devine right of Kings. Again it has historically been the ruling philosophy. If we would save the grand experiment of constitutional democracy we had damn well better get busy.
SinghX
Dec. 26th, 2011 at 11:01 am
Sinclair Lewis wrote the satirical political novel, “It Can’t Happen Here” (1935) at a time when the United States and Western Europe had been in a depression for several years. Lewis asks the question – what if some ambitious politician would use the presidential election to make himself dictator by promising quick, easy solutions to the depression…just as Hitler had done in Germany in 1933.
It is no “satire” listening to the hopeful “chosen ones” of the GOP this cycle. Republicans have been attempting dictatorship for several years, but, they can’t find a really functional charismatic…those pesky liberals, scholars, law abiding citizens, investigative reporters all seem to blow the lid off the charlatans. Too bad, so sad…
I sort of think this is their last chance because the old guard is getting pretty dang old and long in the tooth to keep the rally alive and well…there are signs that the majority of republican youth could care less about the gay agenda, aren’t so keen on seeing their “options” for abortion go away plus, if they don’t get a job with the father-in-law in corporate land, then there are more “Bluths” using up the trust funds…
Put a fork in them; they’re cooked…the rest of us are left with the mess, clean up.
Reynardine
Dec. 26th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Because the Partysnatchers have consistently used both the courts and the power even a minotity bloc can wield in the Senate can use to block or nullify the power of a Democratic administration and yet continue to negate the legitimacy of the separation of powers, one can only suppose they intend to seize the Executive by any means necessary, by fear, fraud, or favor, and keep it by force. Their noisy façade bears watching less than what is going on behind the scenes.
Deborah Montesano
Dec. 26th, 2011 at 3:12 pm
It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which the Republicans could void the courts, since the three branches of government are the foundation of the Constitution and the courts can rule on the constitutionality of any law. However, in my 9th grade civics class (back when there WERE civics classes), our teacher guided us to set up a democratic government in the classroom, then came in one day and said that, due to an emergency, he needed to temporarily suspend our constitution. Sadly, all but one of us voted to allow him to do so. Even more sadly, I wasn’t the one who opposed it–but I sure learned a lesson!
get real
Dec. 26th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
Nixon tried this approach. Didn’t work out too well for him.
The hypocrisy of Republicans is breathtaking.
mikeyhatesit
Dec. 26th, 2011 at 7:12 pm
Back in 2005, Dominionists and other conservatives called for the removal of Justice Roberts from the bench. He also received hundreds of death threats for his decision regarding the Kitzmiller v. Dover case. After hearing the case wherein he determined that the Dover School Board violated the rights of its students by striking evolution from the curriculum to be replaced by creationism. One of the biggest things to come out of his decision was the precedent setting ruling that any form of creationism or intelligent design was based in religion, thus having no place in a scientific course of study. The other major piece of information that made the Right Wing’s claim of judicial activism ridiculous: Roberts is a conservative Republican with a record that reflects this. He was appointed by President George W. Bush.