I think the process which has gotten us where we are is complex, but I'll try a simple version:
It takes big money to get on TV for big elections.
Only extreme candidates can raise the big money from wealthy individuals and PACs.
The elected officials either make extreme changes or blame the other side for obstructing.
The important work of the country gets done in the US Supreme court by 9 people not elected but appointed by extreme presidents.
We swing one way then another, always people reacting poorly to court decisions.
To break the cycle we need a moderate president who can make centrist court appointments. Then we need Congress to change the judicial review process from debating appointees on TV to more serious analysis.
Otherwise I see the trend continuing...
A constitutional tool NEVER used is the power to impeach federal judges. There are many cases the courts have decided that are obviously in opposition to the constitution. The Constitution being the supreme law of the land, what could be a "higher crime", or worse "behaviour"? A perfect example is an 1886 decision, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, in which the supreme court decided that corporations are people, even though corporations are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. Since this was apparently???? a unanimous opinion, the entire supreme court should have been impeached. A more recent supreme court case, 2024, Kelo v. City of New London, allowed the confiscation of private property for "public benefit", where the Constitution clearly says "public use". All 5 majority justices should be impeached.
I think the abuses that you describe are too frequent. I dont think Unity will get that far by '08 but it is the worst result of political extremism that we have.
I haven't heard of impeaching judges, is that the right of Congress? Would it be like a presidential impeachment process?
This will absolutely never happen on the basis of court rulings; only on the basis of severe ethics or law violations by a justice.
We will not change the direction of the Supreme Court for the next 20 years unless we can get them to go hunting with Dick Cheney.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
But it should, and could.
You're one of the thoughtful shoutbox people, but if the High Court continues its business of turning out extreme right/left "interpretations" it doens't matter who the president is or who controls Congress or what war we're in.
If we cant cahnge it for 20 years, then my kids are going to be raised in a much worse country than I was. Having 9 unelected lawyers deciding most key issues isn't much of a democracy or republic. In fact, its not worse than communism or facism.
I going to hope you're dead wrong about this, at least the time frame. Lets work to change the Court within 10 years.
What's the first step?
assassination is the only possible step. There are no legal remedies, other than impeachment, which will not happen.
but that is as tough as any issue we have.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
It is what it is - a moderating braking force in the schlerotic hyperpluralism, hyper-responsiveness (to special interests) that government has become. Must take the good with the bad sometimes visavi the Supremes.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Okay now they're going to tell the states what kinds of ID they can ask for at polling places.
I am not a big fan of these people...
This is not surprising for a court that is leaning heavily to the right. It is a way to disqualify voters. Who would be disqualified? You tell me. The judiciary is unfortunately a political force to be reckoned with.
Phil
Been to the Unity08 Delegate wiki lately? Join today!http://unity-usa.org
Lets uncorrupt our government!
How would you vote if you dont drive? If you're a college student you're probably okay.
What about the others?
This is a process problem, not a constitutional interpretation.
You're right the judiciary is a force, but not a democratic one.
The last 11 out of 13 Supreme Court Justices have been nominated by Republican Presidents. As a result, the court has made a decided shift to the right. Don't be surprised to find decisions that will overturn previous decisions. Roe v Wade is one that comes to mind.
The see-saw approach to nominations does not take us forward.
Phil
Been to the Unity08 Delegate wiki lately? Join today!http://unity-usa.org
Lets uncorrupt our government!
Well said Phil
A blatant attempt to scare people Phil. Roe v Wade is about as likely to be overturned as we are to establish a colony on Jupiter. By definition, a conservative court is less likely to overturn.
First, Jupiter is too inhospitable to humans and its gravity is far too powerful for it to be even remotely considered for a colony. Overturn of Roe v Wade is far more likely.
Second, you are using the wrong definition of conservative. Conservatives and Liberals are equally activist. The conservative definition in use here is the one that would cause the courts to lean to interpretations that revert back to past traditional perspectives, i.e. anti-abortion.
Phil
Been to the Unity08 Delegate wiki lately? Join today!http://unity-usa.org
Lets uncorrupt our government!
The Supremes might not overturn but they definitely will chip away around the edges in little ways and little cases. They won't risk a big assault directly but may limit it's scope severely.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I am far more concerned about this "conservative" court's recent ruling on eminent domain. Overturning Roe v. Wade would turn the decision back to the states. Kelo v. City of New London has eliminated private property rights. I am not using "conservative" incorrectly, The supreme soviet, I mean court is.
Hey! That is why we need to keep firmly in mind the President's one KEY power - Supreme Court Noms! All other Prez powers pale in comparison!! With that one power he has sway over social and political and policy for decades.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Thomas Jefferson warned the Supreme Court would be our downfall.
It has for the most part been a cement and a savior as it has worked out. can't imagine where our nation would be without the SC! It's not perfect for sure but so much more so than the other 2 branches IMHO.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I too have no idea where we would be without it. It started out to be the saviour you describe. It's decisions where adamantly in support of individual rights opposed to gov't power. It has been sliding the other way ever since, to the point that now, seldom is gov't restrained from anything.
The only one of the Bill of Rights fully and unarguably intact is the 3rd, and that because the gov't has no possible need to violate it.
The individual citizen has no advocate in the three branches, and with the castration of the states, he has no refuge.
I would like to see the Supreme court regulated like many state courts, by requiring approval of the people every few years to remain in office. With life terms, they are in effect nobility.
Goes back to my point that Presidential Elections Matter!! The Demos have been pooping around in their Partisan sandbox funk thinking they can have their cake and eat it also and thus suffer the consequences - 11 out the last 13 Supreme noms Repubs. Actions HAVE consequences folks!!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I posted my opinion on Eminent Domain on my web moths ago Response was Excellent ..
My Position : The Decision To Require You To Give Up Your Property and The Compensation you should receive SHOULD BE DECIDED BY A JURY OF YOUR PEERS IN YOUR OWN COMMUNITY .. NOT BY CITY/STATE OR COUNTY OFFICIALS WHO MAY BE IN BED WITH UNSCRUPULOUS DEVELOPERS !!
Criminals have a right to a Trial by a Jury Of Their Peers To Decide Their Fate : SURELY LAW ABIDING CITIZENS ARE ENTITLED TO THE SAME RIGHTS TO DECIDE THEIR FATE .. A Mans Rights To His Home & Property Must Have At Least The Same Protection Under The Law as a Criminal ..
THE SUPREME COURT FAILED IN ITS RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ON THIS ONE : They Threw It Back To The People Who's sole interest was Taking
Peoples Property When They Don't want to sell - AND DOING IT ON THE CHEAP IN LEAGUE WITH DEVELOPERS ..
pete(popo)evans
Its just another example of how the System Is Stacked Against Us
I agree Pete, this round they forgot to read the Constitution, and their memory failed them. The Constitution says "for public use". This court decision reads "for public purpose". Since all public officials are "public servants", everything they do is "for public purpose", right? So they can do whatever they want.
Who cares about Republican nominees, if it doesn't pass the floor? Plus there's always the ablity to impeach just for being the wrong party (reference to Jeffsonian era). Also, the last 3 out of 4 presidents were Republican, I'm pretty sure it's proportionate to the Justices model.
For those of you that missed posting on this subject on my website - you may find this interesting ..
The Rule Of Law governing a Specific Society is supposed to Comply With & Enforce the Dictates o That Union - In out Case : Our Declaration of Independence, Our Constitution (As written & amended with the Advice and consent of the required number of Citizen/Voters) - And Our Bill Of Rights ..
The Rule Of Law In America to day DOES NONE OF THESE THINGS .. consider the following ..
Civil Law : favors the Rich - penalizes the poor, and places an unduly heavy social and economic burden on Society at Large !!
Criminal Law : favors the Criminals, leaves the Victims to fend for themselves, and the discretionary privileges granted Judges - exposes society to un-necessary danger from Career Criminals & Repeat Offenders of all types !!
Judicial Law As Passed By Congress : Favors Professional Politicians and Their Big Buck Backers !!
THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT - The Peoples Court Of Last Resort, Is Controlled By People Beholden To Professional Politicians and Their Decision To Grant Supreme Court Justices "JOBS FOR LIFE" !!
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE ?? I'll Tell You What's Wrong - THE PEOPLE THAT WE PAY TO PROTECT OUR LIVES, LIBERTY & PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS - have been so damn busy looking out for themselves, they've broken every rule and law on the books - and we're paying with our hard earned money and the lives of our loved ones !!
What's The Answer ?!
The PERFECT ANSWER WOULD BE (and picture this) - 2 People, 1 Senator and 1 Congress Person - Take To The Floor Simultaneously in Their Respective Houses AND SHOUT OUT LOUD & CLEAR " ENOUGH IS ENOUGH - THE TIME HAS COME TO GIVE THE PEOPLE WHAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS INTENDED - A GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE & FOR THE PEOPLE !!!! ... I can see it now - reporters scrambling for phones, TV Stations interrupting regular Broadcasts - OVERNIGHT - THE POLITICAL CLIMATE WOULD CHANGE .. UNITY08 With The Agenda I propose and A Ticket of Candidates willing and able to Make IT HAPPEN .. IT WOULD HAPPEN !!
Doug, Jerry, Hamilton - between the three of you YOU MUST KNOW 1 SENATOR & 1 CONGRESS PERSON - THAT WOULD LOVE TO MAKE HISTORY & GO OUT IN A BLAZE OF GLORY !!
Failing that, Phil W, Steve, GP and John - keep moving forward and Build Us The Best Damn Agenda Money Can't Buy.
Kim, have a nice day ..
pete(popo)evans