Judicial Activism

Starting off with some thoughts on the revolt of the Senate "gang of 14" over the nuclear option:

The Wall Street Journal called it a "Senate Charade - a remarkable exercise in political self-protection."

"Judging by all of the self-congratulation, you'd think the 14 Senators who reached a deal Monday on judicial nominations were the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers. ‘We have kept the Republic,’ declared Democrat Robert Byrd, with all due modesty. ‘The Senate won’ and ‘the country won,’ added Republican John McCain. All 14 are apparently destined for Mount Rushmore, as soon as Mr. Byrd can stuff the money for the sculpture into an appropriations bill."

Tony Blankley called them a "Senate Regency."

"The Senate has been placed into receivership by 14 self-appointed trustees, several of whom are among the Senate's most wanton exhibitionists. Some of these ladies and gentlemen can be seen almost daily preening in front of television cameras confessing their moral superiority over their colleagues by virtue of their lack of firm convictions and their unwillingness to be team players."

"So begins the Regency Period of the Senate. As long as these fourteen stick together, nothing can pass the Senate. By organizing into a blocking mechanism — and presumably swearing blood oaths of loyalty to each other in a secret ceremony out of sight of the uninitiated — they have created a new tradition."

Thomas Sowell called the Republicans a "Compromised Party."

"The Senate Democrats hung tough and the Republicans wimped out. The Republicans had the votes but they didn't have the guts. Republican Senator Charles Grassley was one of the few who called a spade a spade, when he characterized what happened as "unilateral disarmament" by the Republicans."

"What is of major importance is that the American people lost a golden opportunity --- to set in concrete both the Senate's right to vote on judicial nominees and the American people's right to govern themselves, instead of being ruled by judges who increasingly take decisions out of the hands of elected officials and impose their own personal policy preferences."

As usual Tom Sowell exposed the fundamental issue: Who is to decide? For too many years the judiciary has subverted the Constitution by creating U.S. law, the role that the Constitution reserves for the people and their representatives. It no longer matters what legislation is crafted by our elected officials or what state constitutional amendments are voted for by the people. The appellate courts and the Supreme Court modify or eliminate these constitutionally protected actions as suits their own purposes. Such judicial activism must be stopped, by electing judges who abhor the practice.