Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Judicial Supremacy – Should We Stand Down And Let It Rule The Land?

Judicial Supremacy – Should We Stand Down And Let It Rule The Land?:

Share

Judicial Supremacy

There seems to be more than a little confusion about a trend we see developing across America. That trend is the false theory that the Judicial Branch is superior to the other two branches that make up the government of the United States. This trend is not one that has just cropped up out of nowhere. Instead, it has been in the works for decades. Once the Supreme Court rules, everyone just bows down and accepts what they have ruled as gospel. Never mind how nonsensical the ruling may be. We need to keep something in mind. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the Judicial Branch, but that does not mean they are the last word on any given issue. Here is Mike Huckabee explaining how that just isn’t so, courtesy of Angry White Dude.

Mike Huckabee – I wonder sometimes, do we still teach civics in school?  Are Americans, even elected officials, lawyers and judges utterly ignorant about the structure of our government and how it functions?
I assume everyone citizen knows that we’ve got three branches of government and each equal to the other. The founders took extraordinary measures to prevent too much power being grabbed by one person or group. The system they created is sometimes cumbersome, but it’s based on the longest-used Constitution in human history.
The Congress controls the purse, the money; the Executive branch controls the sword, and the judicial branch watches over and offers opinions as to the Constitutional compliance of the other two.
My friend Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel and Dean at the Liberty University School of Law points out in his outstanding book Judicial Tyranny: “The Bill of Rights is designed to protect the liberties of the minority against the majority. However, our constitutional makeup does not give the minority veto rights over the majority; the major political and social questions of our day has by constitutional design been given to the majority through the legislative process. Continually taking away the right of the majority to shape their culture will ultimately result in rebellion. To take away the right of the people to debate the question leads to an oligarchy (or government of the few) and results in tyranny.”
This week, the Supreme Court declined to take up cases from the court of appeals regarding same-sex marriage in a number of states where the people had already voted to affirm natural law marriage of a man and a woman. In these states, typically, a single robed judge decided that his opinion mattered more than the collective votes of the people themselves.
The Supreme Court refused to hear these cases, despite the confusion that exists due to its own Windsor decision last year which struck down the Defense of Marriage Act. Several governors and other elected officials reacted by saying, “Well, that’s it. That is the final word.”  Horse apples! The Supreme Court is not the supreme being. Yes, it’s the highest court within one of the three branches of government, but it isn’t superior to the other two.
In recent years, the doctrine of judicial supremacy has trampled both the Constitution and common sense. The court can certainly rule on an issue, but unless the legislature passes enabling legislation and funds it, and unless the Executive branch signs it and enforces it, it is certainly not “the law of the land,” as is often exclaimed with authority by voices that belong to people that, I wonder, did they pass 9th grade civics? The law of the land requires agreement of all three branches.
Now, this is not just about same-sex marriage, with which I frankly disagree with. I, by the way, hold the same view that President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden held until just 2 years ago – that it was inconsistent with nature and nature’s law.
But the bigger issue is the betrayal of our Constitution and the surrender to a small group of unelected black-robed jurists who can’t make law nor enforce it. Now, if you believe men should marry men and women should marry women, then get the people’s representatives to vote for it, the chief executive to sign it, and then have the courts agree with it.
I’m utterly disgusted with fellow Republicans who want to walk away from the issue of judicial supremacy because it’s politically volatile. Here’s my advice: Grow a spine! Show a modicum of knowledge about the way we govern ourselves! And lead, follow, or get the heck out of the way!
In his own unique way, Mike Huckabee has described, to a tee, what one of the biggest problems Americans face today. Far too many of us, elected officials included, have no clue how our system of government is supposed to work. As a result, we now have same-sex marriage being considered the “law of the land” in states where the majority of the people clearly have no desire to have it thus. We also have the court system declaring certain things to be “unconstitutional” on their own whim and fancy. The Texas Voter ID law was struck down by a liberal in a black robe, declaring it to be a poll tax, even though the state-issued ID cards cost the individual exactly zero dollars. That’s right, they were to be supplied, free of charge, to anyone who needed one.

How long has this been going on? I would dare say it has gone on at least since 1973. For those of you who do not know, that was the fateful year the murder of unborn children was made legal by the United States Supreme Court. The trend has grown stronger ever since. There is, however, one small fact that seems to have gone unnoticed. The courts are laying down the law of the land, but it is only to be followed when it fits into the liberal agenda.

Case in point would be the events that unfolded following the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. It took very few days before President Obama took advantage of the tragedy to declare a moratorium on all further exploration and drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Time was needed, he said, to make sure of the safety of the rigs and equipment. His decision placed a financial burden on a great number of workers who relied on the oil and gas industry for their livelihood. Some of these people finally got fed up with being unable to pay their bills and filed suit. A judge ruled that President Obama had no established cause to stop all drilling in the Gulf and ordered him to lift the ban on drilling. The judge’s order was ignored until President Obama was good and ready to allow drilling to resume.

The question of the day remains. Should we sit idly by and accept judicial supremacy as the law of the land, or should we stand up and say no more? If we fail to do the later, I am afraid America will never be able to recover from the hole she is in.

.

.

.

Share