Re: OT: Political

Ya'll have been discussing the views of liberals and conservatives on the
subject and definition of judicial activism. What are your views on the
following?

The role of the Federal judiciary within the Federal government, and
within society generally, has become the subject of increasing controversy
in recent years. It has become the target of both popular and academic
criticism that alleges that the judicial branch has usurped many of the
prerogatives of other branches and levels of government.

Some of the characteristics of this "judicial activism" have been said to
include:

a. A tendency by the judiciary toward problem-solution rather than
grievance-resolution;

b. A tendency by the judiciary to employ the individual plaintiff as a
vehicle for the imposition of far-reaching orders extending to broad
classes of individuals;

c. A tendency by the judiciary to impose broad, affirmative duties upon
governments and society;

d. A tendency by the judiciary toward loosening jurisdictional
requirements such as standing and ripeness; and

e. A tendency by the judiciary to impose itself upon other institutions
in the manner of an administrator with continuing oversight
responsibilities.

Under our constitutional system, the federal judiciary has critical
responsibilities, including the preservation of individual rights, which
it must not hesitate to discharge despite popular or academic criticism.
In fulfilling these responsibilities in cases properly brought in the
federal courts, the judiciary should make appropriate use of sanctioned
remedies.

At the same time, however, the judiciary should be careful not to usurp
the rightful powers of the other branches of the federal government or
those -of the states and their subdivisions, for ultimately the separation
and distribution of government powers is one of the most important
safeguards of freedom under our Constitution. One of the ways in which
the Constitution seeks to confine federal courts to their proper sphere is
by limiting their jurisdiction and by restricting the judicial power to
actual "cases" and "controversies" (Art. Ill, sec. 2). Accordingly, as
the Supreme Court has pointed out, federal courts must faithfully respect
the limits of their jurisdiction and must heed the doctrines of standing
and ripeness, which are rooted in vital Article III concerns.

While courts should use all proper judicial remedies to correct violations
of law, the courts must ensure that they do not step over the line into
the fields of lawmaking or governmental administration, where the
judiciary generally lacks both authority and expertise. Courts are well
suited to decide the particular cases that come before them, but they
cannot match the ability of legislative bodies to gather facts or frame
comprehensive rules of law regulating complex activities. Similarly,
courts cannot equal the resources or expertise generally employed by
executive agencies in administering large governmental facilities or
programs for extended periods of time.

In sum, our system of government works best when the federal judiciary -
and indeed, all three branches-resist the temptation to extend their
powers beyond their intended spheres.

--
Ed Jay (remove M to respond by email)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Political
    ... The following is a criticism involving judicial activism. ... >prerogatives of other branches and levels of government. ... A tendency by the judiciary toward problem-solution rather than ... >the Constitution seeks to confine federal courts to their proper sphere is ...
    (rec.arts.dance)
  • Re: OT: Political
    ... > prerogatives of other branches and levels of government. ... > Some of the characteristics of this "judicial activism" have been said to ... A tendency by the judiciary toward problem-solution rather than ... > the Constitution seeks to confine federal courts to their proper sphere is ...
    (rec.arts.dance)
  • Re: OT: Political
    ... >The following is a criticism involving judicial activism. ... >>prerogatives of other branches and levels of government. ... A tendency by the judiciary toward problem-solution rather than ... >>the Constitution seeks to confine federal courts to their proper sphere is ...
    (rec.arts.dance)
  • Re: OT: Political
    ... >>The following is a criticism involving judicial activism. ... >>>prerogatives of other branches and levels of government. ... >>>the Constitution seeks to confine federal courts to their proper sphere is ...
    (rec.arts.dance)
  • Re: My Presidential Pick for 2006
    ... The government has no right to limit religious expression, ... Constitution does prohibit is an /establishment/ of religion. ... a high school football game. ... And yet the courts have been involved in cases of each. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated)