Expert:
Paul Edward Zukowski
Date: 9/2/2001
Subject: Judges in the US
Question
Should judges consider the social
consequences of their decisions? What
if the case involves an individual
who has committed a hideous crime
and the judge is being asked to release
the individual on a technicality?
Please incorporate an example from
today along with your answers, so
I will understand better.
Thanks.
Get the answer below
Answer
Hi Shelley
>>Should judges consider the
social consequences of their decisions?
No, they are bound to rule by the
laws of the state.
Those that go outside of those guide
lines (if they can)
is referred to as judicial activism
and is a abuse of power. Judge Fuller
rapes my children's souls Tells me
as a father they can not go to religious
or private schools. Steals a life
time of asserts turns it over to the
mother because I wanted to be involved
with my children. Ignores years of
alienation. Abuses power by
hiding evidence, ignoring facts and
fails to follow the law.
The classic modern example of judicial
activism is Roe VS Wade abortion case.
If you read the US Constitution there
is no right to privacy anywhere in
it.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html#preamble
Many people who have not read it are
surprised how limited the government
is supposed to be.
Back to Roe VS Wade the opinion in
the case was 80 pages long and go
through tortured logic to explain
this decision.
Most opinions are about 10 pages.
Regardless how you feel about abortion
this was a bad law.
Because they was no real basis for
the case, you see all the political
protest regarding abortion. They know
this could easily be tossed out by
a new ruling on a new case.
They also know it is a coin flip if
abortion will legal at all if it had
to be made legal by state legislatures
making it law. Since the 1960s liberal
political activist have used courts
with liberal judges on them to advance
an agenda they could not get through
the political process.
Conservatives by definition do not
engage in judicial activism.
Another thing you find if you read
the constitution it doesn't say there
is a separation between church and
state. This is what it says.
Amendment I Unless you are a non custodial
dad. I have a right to keep my children
away from the "states" brain
washing of my children in the "state
school system. But I was wrong the
activist judge can make parental decisions
without my consent.!! It appears the
constitution is a joke. You
might as well wipe your ass with it.
Congress shall make no law respecting
an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof
What it really says is they can't
make an official state religion like
a The Church of England. You can't
stop people
taking part in any religion.
It is unconstitional to stop expression
of religion in schools. Yet courts
have done this.
Take the Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary
to the security of a free state, the
right of the people to keep and bear
arms, shall not be infringed.
Who is the militia? All able bodied
citizens not otherwise in government
service. What law should they make
regarding guns?
None!!!
Article I Section 8.
To provide for organizing, arming,
and disciplining, the militia, and
for governing such part of them as
may be employed in the service of
the United States,
reserving to the states respectively,
the appointment of the officers, and
the authority of training the militia
according to the discipline prescribed
by Congress;
The federal government is supposed
to be providing guns and ammo a structure
to use the militia and citizens are
obligated to take part.
See you have a court being activist
by not over ruling unconstitutional
laws. ALL the gun control laws are
unconstitutional. People should be
sueing the government because they
are not getting their free guns &
ammo.
No the National Guard is not the militia,
it is part of the
US Army.
They do sell rifles at
www.odcmp.com
Clinton tried to cut this off in 1995
and it failed, so they
removed the funding and things are
not real cheap anymore and the ammo
is no longer free plus shipping.
The DCM was replaced by CMP in 1996.
The Department of Civilian Marksmanship
was around since right after the the
US Civil war to get military arms
into
civilian hands. The National Rifle
Association was founded
to provide the training in use of
arms. I was not political till 90
years later.
States have also failed in their responsibly
to the militia. They passed it off
to the CMP/NRA affiliated gun clubs.
So judicial activism can be action
or inaction by the courts.
Article III of the constitution address
the courts.
Section 1. The judicial power of the
United States, shall be vested in
one Supreme Court, and in such inferior
courts as the Congress may from time
to time
ordain and establish. The judges,
both of the supreme and inferior courts,
shall hold their offices during good
behaviour, and shall, at stated times,
receive for
their services, a compensation, which
shall not be diminished during their
continuance in office.
Section 2. 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.
Section 3. Treason against the United
States, shall consist only in levying
war against them, or in adhering to
their enemies, giving them aid and
comfort. No
person shall be convicted of treason
unless on the testimony of two witnesses
to the same overt act, or on confession
in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare
the punishment of treason, but no
attainder of treason shall work corruption
of blood, or forfeiture except during
the
life of the person attainted.
That is it.
>>What if the case involves
an individual who has committed a
hideous crime and the judge is being
asked to release the individual on
a technicality?
Most technicalities are not trivial.
We live under a constitution. If the
governments breaks the rules we set
up they should walk. Most things refered
to as a technicality fall under 4th,
5th, 6th or 8th amendment. They are
as follows;
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure
in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable
searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no
warrants shall issue, but upon probable
cause, supported by oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place
to be searched, and the persons or
things to
be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer
for a capital, or otherwise infamous
crime, unless on a presentment or
indictment of a grand jury, except
in cases arising in the
land or naval forces, or in the militia,
when in actual service in time of
war or public danger; nor shall any
person be subject for the same offense
to be twice put
in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall
be compelled in any criminal case
to be a witness against himself, nor
be deprived of life, liberty, or property,
without due
process of law; nor shall private
property be taken for public use,
without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the
accused shall enjoy the right to a
speedy and public trial, by an impartial
jury of the state and district wherein
the crime shall have
been committed, which district shall
have been previously ascertained by
law, and to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation; to be
confronted with the witnesses against
him; to have compulsory process for
obtaining witnesses in his favor,
and to have the assistance of counsel
for his defense.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required,
nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel
and unusual punishments inflicted.
So as you can see these are not minor
things
