| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"Dana" |
| Date: |
26 Aug 2003 01:55:39 AM |
| Object: |
Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary |
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20030825.shtml
Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary
Phyllis Schlafly
Federal court decisions about the Pledge of Allegiance and the Ten
Commandments, and the specter raised by the U.S. Supreme Court decision in
Lawrence vs. Texas that marriage may no longer be defined as the union of a
man and a woman, show that the time has come to curb the "Imperial
Judiciary."
Not only did a single federal judge overturn a nearly 60 percent majority of
California voters who passed Proposition 187 in 1994, but another U.S.
District Court judge in Sacramento actually considered canceling the
historic California gubernatorial recall election before declining to act on
a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union.
Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers 78, 81 and 82 that he
expected Congress to use its "discretion" to make appropriate "exceptions
and regulations" to keep the judiciary "the least dangerous" of the three
branches of government. It's long past time for Congress to protect U.S.
citizens from activist judges who are assaulting fundamental American
principles.
When the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by 2-1 banned the pledge of
Allegiance on June 26, 2002, because of the words "under God," Congress on
the same day adopted resolutions of appropriate indignation in a House vote
of 416-3 and a Senate vote of 99-0.
When the full 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reconsider this
outrageous decision, the Senate on March 4, 2003, reaffirmed its support for
the pledge as written by a vote of 94-0, and the House did likewise on March
20, 2003, by a vote of 400-7.
Two cheers for Congress. But that's not enough to fulfill its constitutional
duty to demote the federal courts to their proper status.
Congress has failed to solve the pledge problem, and federal judges haven't
gotten the message.
In July, one federal judge barred Pennsylvania teachers from obeying a state
law that required them to lead their classes in reciting the pledge or
singing the national anthem. In August, another federal judge banned a
Colorado law requiring public school teachers to lead the pledge.
Public opinion has always been strongly in favor of schoolchildren reciting
the Pledge of Allegiance. Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis' veto of a
state law requiring teachers to lead the pledge helped to elect George H.W.
Bush to the presidency in 1988.
If there ever was a case where Congress should act promptly to withdraw
jurisdiction from the federal courts, this is it. U.S. Rep. Todd Akin,
R-Mo., already has 220 co-sponsors for H.R. 2028, the proposed Pledge
Protection Act. A companion bill in the Senate is sponsored by Judiciary
Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Sen. Jim Talent, R-Mo.
So what is Congress waiting for? All federal courts except the U.S. Supreme
Court were created by Congress under Article III, Section 1, of the U.S.
Constitution, so Congress can uncreate, limit or withdraw jurisdiction from
them, as well as create "exceptions" to Supreme Court jurisdiction.
Congress has used this authority scores of times. Most recently, Senate
Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., inserted a provision in legislation to
prohibit the courts from hearing cases about brush clearing in South Dakota.
Surely, the Pledge of Allegiance is equally as important.
The House, but not the Senate, inched a little closer toward doing its duty
in July when it passed two amendments sponsored by Rep. John Hostettler,
R-Ind., to stop enforcement of two obnoxious federal court rulings. One
amendment, which passed 307-119, prohibits spending federal money to enforce
the 9th U.S. Circuit Court's anti-pledge decision, and the second, adopted
260-161, does likewise for the 11th U.S. Circuit Court ruling that the Ten
Commandments may not be posted in the lobby of the Alabama Supreme Court.
A national campaign to exorcise the Ten Commandments from public buildings
has been accelerating since the Supreme Court ruled in Stone vs. Graham
(1980) that they may not be posted in public school classrooms. Recent cases
have popped up in at least 13 states to force removal of the Ten
Commandments from all public buildings and squares.
The showdown in Montgomery, Ala., stems from the decision by state Supreme
Court Chief Justice Roy Moore to place a 5,280-pound granite monument to the
Ten Commandments in the state courthouse. However, the other eight Alabama
justices - seven Republicans, one Democrat - voted Aug. 21 to have the
monument removed to avoid having the state pay $5,000 per day in federal
fines.
Despite a vitriolic hammering by the media, Moore has the public on his side
and crowds numbering in the thousands have gathered in Montgomery in the
August heat to support him.
U.S. Rep. Robert Aderholt's Ten Commandments Defense Act, H.R. 2045,
declares that the display of the Ten Commandments on state property is
within the powers the U.S. Constitution reserves to the states, thereby
removing challenges from federal court jurisdiction. The Alabama
Republican's bill passed the House in 1999, but not the Senate, and
currently has 64 co-sponsors.
Since the Supreme Court this year voided Texas' sodomy law without any
rational justification in the U.S. Constitution, pro-homosexual commentary
in the media has been preparing the public for court rulings that legalize
same-sex marriages and invalidate the Defense of Marriage Act, which was
passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton in 1996 and enacted in 38
states. But since the Lawrence decision, a Gallup Poll has reported a drop
of 12 points in public support for same-sex marriages.
It is possible that the Supreme Court may use procedural grounds to duck the
lead cases on the Pledge of Allegiance, the Ten Commandments, and the
definition of marriage. The dozens of cases arising all over the country
make it imperative for Congress to withdraw jurisdiction on these three
issues from all federal courts. Any member of Congress who defaults in this
duty should be defeated in 2004.
"The Declaration of Independence... [is the] declaratory charter of our
rights, and the rights of man."
-- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), 3rd President of the United States
(1801-1809)
--
"The Declaration of Independence... [is the] declaratory charter of our
rights, and the rights of man."
-- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), 3rd President of the United States
(1801-1809)
.
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary |
26 Aug 2003 04:46:38 AM |
|
|
"Dana" <yourname@example.com> wrote:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20030825.shtml
Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary
Phyllis Schlafly
Federal court decisions about the Pledge of Allegiance and the Ten
Commandments, and the specter raised by the U.S. Supreme Court decision in
Lawrence vs. Texas that marriage may no longer be defined as the union of a
man and a woman,
That was not the decision in Lawrence. Another nincompoop who did not
read the decision before proving their idiocy.
Not only did a single federal judge overturn a nearly 60 percent majority of
California voters who passed Proposition 187 in 1994,
Whoopie. And the Civil War overturned the slavery rights of millions
of Southerners. Do we feel sorry for them? Not at all.
but another U.S.
District Court judge in Sacramento actually considered canceling the
historic California gubernatorial recall election before declining to act on
a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union.
That IS what courts are supposed to do: consider cases that are
brought before them.
Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers 78, 81 and 82 that he
expected Congress to use its "discretion" to make appropriate "exceptions
and regulations" to keep the judiciary "the least dangerous" of the three
branches of government.
That is not what he said:
The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword
or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of
the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly
be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must
ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the
efficacy of its judgments.
This simple view of the matter suggests several important
consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond
comparison the weakest of the three departments of power [1] ; that
it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that
all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against
their attacks.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rick and Lisa" |
|
| Title: Re: Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary |
26 Aug 2003 09:26:17 AM |
|
|
--
"The Declaration of Independence... [is the] declaratory charter of our
rights, and the rights of man."
-- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), 3rd President of the United States
(1801-1809)
Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be one,
He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of blindfolded
Fear. -- Thomas Jefferson
Thanks for playing
the rick
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary |
26 Aug 2003 02:27:13 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:55:39 -0800, "Dana" <yourname@example.com> wrote:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20030825.shtml
Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary
Phyllis Schlafly
SCHLAFLY????
Christ, Buttmaster
Are you Insane as well as sick and disgusting?
---------------------------------------------------
ladies use my tongue for your pleasure
</groups?q=author:danaraffaniello%40worldnet.
att.net&start=210&hl=en&lr=&ie=UT>F-8&selm=
63j187%24nji%40bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net&rnum=226>
swm very oral will orally worship any female that wishes to be worshipped.
will kiss and lick your feet and butt .
might be wiling to be your toilet paper if you
are that aggressive
.
|
|
|
| User: "Otis" |
|
| Title: Re: Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary |
26 Aug 2003 03:42:22 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 13:27:13 -0600, wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:55:39 -0800, "Dana" <yourname@example.com> wrote:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20030825.shtml
Time has come for Congress to rein in the Imperial Judiciary
Phyllis Schlafly
STILL WAITING!
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/218/region/State_to_reduce_welfare_benefiP.shtml
State to reduce welfare benefits for 16,000
By Associated Press, 8/6/2003 13:08
BOSTON (AP) The state will reduce welfare benefits to 16,000
recipients on Sept. 1 due to budget cuts approved by the Legislature
in June, according to the state Department of Health and Human
Services.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
