Domestic Diversions

Separation of powers

The New York Times Editorial highlights the federal state of the courts report (excerpt):
Without naming names, Chief Justice Rehnquist spoke of a troubling “new turn” in recent years that has seen some conservative Republicans in Congress cross the line from ordinary criticism of judicial decisions they do not like to trying to intimidate individual judges. In the process, they show disrespect to the constitutional separation of powers and threaten the essential role of an independent judiciary in protecting American rights.

The Chief Justice’s Report includes these comments (excerpt):
Criticism of judges has dramatically increased in recent years, exacerbating in some respects the strained relationship between the Congress and the federal Judiciary. But criticism of judges and judicial decisions is as old as our republic, an outgrowth to some extent of the tensions built into our three-branch system of government. To a significant degree these tensions are healthy in maintaining a balance of power in our government.
By guaranteeing judges life tenure during good behavior, the Constitution tries to insulate judges from the public pressures that may affect elected officials. The Constitution protects judicial independence not to benefit judges, but to promote the rule of law: judges are expected to administer the law fairly, without regard to public reaction. Nevertheless, our government, in James Madison’s words, ultimately derives “all powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people.” Thus, public reaction to judicial decisions, if it is sustained and widespread, can be a factor in the electoral process and lead to the appointment of judges who might decide cases differently.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.