Guest View: Term limits curb activist judges.
Some things are bigger than politics. Here’s one of them: In a free society, no one should get to hold office in perpetuity. Power, unchecked, turns into arrogance and corruption. If you or anyone needs proof, look no further than the perpetually re-elected United States Congress, which, under the control of both Republicans and Democrats, has become the poster-child for dysfunctional governing.
When I recently proposed to apply this concept — term limits — to Florida appellate court judges, I encountered resistance. Not surprisingly, judges weren’t fans. Neither was the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board. However, rather than engage in a debate on the merits of the idea, the Sentinel took the low road and attacked my motives by claiming, without evidence or personal knowledge, that this was about “political payback.”
Let’s quickly dispatch that criticism.
First, not one single justice currently serving on the Florida Supreme Court would be affected by my proposal.
Second, every other appellate judge currently serving and potentially affected by the proposal was appointed by a Republican governor, not a Democrat.
Third, Thomas Jefferson, whom Democrats today claim as the founder of their party, when speaking of the judiciary, said that its members possess “the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps,” but that, “Their power is the more dangerous because they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to elective control.” Jefferson was as right then as he is today.
If I’m going for political payback, I’m not doing a very good job of it.
The truth is that I have great respect for the role of the judiciary. When a person feels that they have been wronged under the law — either by another private citizen or by the government — they turn to the courts to resolve their dispute. The courts interpret the law as it applies to a set of facts.
Judges decide cases. Unfortunately, in recent years we have seen some appellate judges overreach. Rather than interpreting the law and applying it to the facts before them, they decide what they think the law should have been in the first place. Acting like an unelected super-legislature, they issue rulings that extend beyond the facts of the case and produce sweeping changes to the public policy of our state on issues ranging from the death penalty to education to insurance.
Judges — like legislators and governors and presidents — should act only within their constitutional powers. Judicial activism — whether perpetrated by conservative judges or liberal judges — undermines the rule of law. It short-circuits democracy, and it erodes the separation of powers.
Imposing a 12-year term limit on appellate judges won’t, by itself, eliminate the problem of judicial activism. But it will ensure that the men and women who wear the robes of the judge will never make the mistake of thinking they are more important than the offices they hold.