Thursday, March 03, 2005
The American Spectator comes this great insight: "The Supreme Court's judicial activists are cutting off the branch on which they sit. By rejecting the law and putting their personal opinions in its place, the justices invite the people to imitate them and disregard their decrees with the same willfulness they disregard the Constitution. If Anthony Kennedy isn't bound by the framers' words, why are the people bound by his?"
I'm not sure exactly how this will play out... perhaps over gay marriage (or some other issue where the Supreme Court takes a position that is way outside the mainstream of public acceptance). Imagine in a year or two, when the liberals on the Court order states to recognize and perform gay marriages. Is it too far fetched to think that there will be a state or two that just out and out refuses to adhere to the Court ruling? Is it too far fetched to think that the (Republican) President might choose to not get involved, to not use his powers to enforce the Supreme Court decision? Or later this year, when the Supreme Court orders any reference to the 10 Commandments purged from sight of the public - maybe a local jurisdiction refuses to remove a statute or take down a painting. The state refuses to intercede, as does the federal government. Poof! The Court's authority dries up as the rebellion spreads - from issue to issue from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, the people decide for the most part that they will be the ones who decide what is right and what is wrong. Soon, the nine justices have as much power and as much influence as the US Commission on Civil Rights: a budget and a microphone but no power whatsoever.
Ironically, the Supreme Court should pay attention to what is happening worldwide. They need to pay attention to what is happening to the world's dictators, as they have much in common. Neither was elected. Both feel they are so very much smarter than the people they rule over. Both feel they are accountable to no one but themselves. Both make things up as they go along, with decisions being made on the basis of nothing more than the whim of the day. Both claim the law is what they say it is, the will of the people be damned. Yet both depend on their subjects accepting their rule. And, althought neither realizes it, both have to tread lightly, for fear of the peasantry rising up. It's happening in Lebanon. It happened in the Ukraine. It could happen here.