A Weak Congress Leads to a Tyrannical Judiciary

A weak Congress leads to a tyrannical judiciary. Do you doubt it? How else can a district court judge dictate immigration and foreign policy contrary to established statutes and constitutional prerogatives? Not only can a lowly judge suspend the laws of the land but he can force the president of the United States to go hat in hand before the Supreme Court to overturn his ruling. Whatever happened to checks and balances? Who’s to check and balance the only branch of government that is unelected and therefore unaccountable?


For every problem that this country faces, I can point to a rogue judicial ruling: Plyler v. Doe legitimized illegal aliens by forcing states to educate their children; Reynolds v. Sims diluted the rural vote and attacked the very premise of a republican form of government which has led to secession movements in California and Colorado; Abington School District v. Schempp forbade Bible reading in public schools and without a doubt has a direct correlation to pervasive immorality and school shootings, and how else can an unelected body of activist judges force the citizenry to uphold their dictates? Well in Cooper v. Aaron they bound the states to uphold their decisions. Isn’t that convenient?


The dirty little secret is Congress has the constitutional authority to check a rogue judiciary. Article III Section 2 states the following:


The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.



In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.


The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.

Therefore, Congress can limit the scope on which federal courts can rule. Here is an excerpt from Limiting Judicial Review by Act of Congress written in 1935:


It is well settled that the inferior federal courts are dependent upon Congress for their existence and the powers they exercise. Once in our early history Congress abolished the inferior federal courts altogether, and in our own time, Congress abolished the United States Circuit Courts. Congress frequently has limited the jurisdiction of the inferior federal courts. Since 1867 the inferior federal courts have been prohibited from enjoining the assessment or collection of a federal tax. For twenty five years District Courts have been prohibited, except by a specially constituted court of three judges, from enjoining the action of the Interstate Commerce Commission or of state officers, under state statutes, claimed to be violative of the-Federal Constitution. And a little more than a year ago Congress passed a statute depriving the United States 'District Courts of jurisdiction under certain circumstances to restrain the enforcement of the orders of state or local utilities' commissions under the due process clause of the Constitution of the United States.


Make no mistake about it, Congress has the constitutional authority to check and balance the federal courts. The only problem is weak leadership and/or a complete ignorance of Congress’ constitutional prerogatives.


Source:


https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://search.yahoo.com/&httpsredir=1&article=3789&context=californialawreview


https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://search.yahoo.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1327&context=facpubs


http://prospect.org/article/overruling-court


https://www.theconstitutionproject.com/portfolio/one-person-one-vote/