Time to curb Supreme Court
Although Chief Justice John Roberts may object to President Trump stating the obvious regarding the federal judiciary, it nevertheless exposes a fundamental flaw in our Constitution (“Judges likely to side with party who named them,” Web, Nov. 26).
The executive and legislative branches of the government are directly answerable to the people. Not so the judiciary. Ever since Marbury v. Madison established the principle of “judicial review” (translation: ‘The constitution means what WE say it does’), what was supposed to be the weakest branch is effectively answerable only to itself.
This arrogance enables the justices to discover a tax that Congress insisted was not a tax. The Supreme Court rendered states’ bicameral legislatures -- modeled after the federal legislature -- redundant in Reynolds v. Sims. There is even a currently seated associate justice who looks to the Constitution of South Africa as inspiration for her opinions.
In practical terms, then, there is very little in our Constitution limiting the power of the federal judiciary.
In his book “The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic,” noted author Mark R. Levin suggests amending the Constitution to limit justices of the Supreme Court to no more than 12 years of service and, among other things, allowing either Congress or the state legislatures to override a Supreme Court opinion. Such an amendment would empower “We The People” to curb judicial excesses.