SCOTUS a bit too powerful

TimesLedger Newspapers
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Get our stories in your inbox, free.

Like TimesLedger on Facebook.

The time has come to examine the power of our federal government, particularly the Supreme Court of the United States.

First of all, the nine Justices are appointed for “good behavior,” which means they’re on the bench for life. Is it in the best interest of our democratic system of government that these nine lawyers have the power to rule on every law that is passed by Congress and signed by the president? Every law that is passed can be challenged in court.

The Supreme Court is presented as one of the three co-equal branches of government. However, the power of the federal courts has changed tremendously over the years.

When our Constitution was first written, the federal courts were considered the least powerful of all three branches of government. Constant litigation had the effect of giving the Supreme Court more power over the other two branches of government. It can be expected that Supreme Court Justices appointed around the age of 50 or more years can serve 30 or more years before retiring.

During that period of time, they are not subject to recall by the people. That is to say, they are not subject to being appointed or elected. A government group such as the Supreme Court can only increase their authority.

In Great Britain, no court can overturn a law passed by Parliament. The House of Commons decides which laws are passed and remain in effect.

In Israel, like Great Britain, there is no Constitution. That is to say, their Parliament decides which laws go into effect and how they are implemented.

The Supreme Court has an advantage over the other two branches of government, since both of the other branches were elected by the people, and must continually face the people in elections. The executive branch of government is subject to term limits, something that the Supreme Court does not face.

With only nine members on the court, they can, over a period of time, become more powerful than they ever were. It becomes increasingly difficult for the other two branches of government to successfully challenge the authority of the federal judiciary.

The Supreme Court has for the last 60 years involved itself in social issues. They have for the most part avoided economic and foreign policy issues. It can be said that the Supreme Court can be considered as a board of directors of our federal government.

In summary, all our legislative members are elected to office. It is also true of those who hold executive positions in government. It is time for our government to examine the powers of the three branches and how they proceed. There needs to be more democratic control over the judicial system in the federal government. We must always have as our goal the maintaining of democratic values.

Updated 12:23 pm, October 31, 2017
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Get our stories in your inbox, free.

Like TimesLedger on Facebook.

Reader feedback

David Moore from Oxford, ms says:
How is it that the same group of people that raised me and educated me about the power and genius of our constitution be so against the constitution. Checks and balances, freedom of speech and states rights are the ideals I was raised on . But now I have government that does not want the courts do do their job of making sure laws are constituonal. Snow flake conservatives that only want to make free speech ok if fits their narrative, and increasingly opposed to states passing laws that best serve their states needs in the form of drug and immigration policy. So much about our country and constitution was setup to keep one group running roughshod over the other, but when the constitution is inconvenient, those that expose its virtues the loudest want to call outdated.
Oct. 10, 2017, 12:56 am
James Barnard from Scottsville says:
A good start would be to return to them requirement that any judge appointed for life be confirmed by a supermajority in the Senate. The recent decisions to allow federal judge and Supreme Court justice confirmation by simple majority inevitably leads to politically biased judges who will do the bidding for decades of whatever political party was, however briefly, in control when they were nominated.
Oct. 10, 2017, 5:07 am
Marcus from Tennessee says:
Poor diction, written for three year olds. Does not present clear argument or conclusion. Author needs to be educated in level of presentation, basic English, logical thinking and rationality. I agree with the author in the pre-occupation with recent courts ( Supreme and lower courts) with social issue interpretation and general avoidance of their constitution protection duties. I also agree with term limitation so that there would be potentially less political polarization by subsequent presidents to limit the functioning of the Court over the term of service of the justices. Old justices are like fish, their thought processes become stale with longer time periods of service.
Oct. 10, 2017, 5:26 am

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.


Keep it local!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter: