Do the Decisions of Federal Judges reflect the Constitution or Political Philosophy?
Our federal judicial system is one of the best if not the best in the world but when individuals are involved in anything issues can arise. Many decisions have been made by individuals within the federal court system and in some cases decisions from one court to another result in different decisions. It is a fact of life. The basis for any federal court decision should be the Constitution.
The job of any federal judge is to understand the concept of the Constitution and actually read the language within it while making decisions on cases before them. There are many fine individuals within the federal courts but for years courts seem to have instilled political philosophy rather than the Constitution. The rights we have under the Constitution and specifically the Bill of Rights should not be impacted by any federal court decision. Many individuals and sometimes groups bring lawsuits to try to curtail or restrict the rights we have as individuals under the Constitution and some courts have let the lawsuits survive when in fact they have no real basis.
One of the basic principles in the Constitution is freedom of religion but there have been many lawsuits generated over the country in what seems to be decades that want to restrict the right to freely express our religious beliefs. Every individual has a right to express their religious beliefs but no one has the right to restrict others from expressing theirs. Another example is the display of the Ten Commandments. There have been mixed decisions on the right to display the Ten Commandments but no one brings up the fact that the Ten Commandments are on the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. Another fact which seems to never be mentioned is that most if not all of the Ten Commandments are incorporated into laws and the objection seems to be centered around they are displayed as the Ten Commandments.
The nomination of Neil Gorsuch signals that President Trump wants to bring back the Constitution within the federal court system. The nominee for the Supreme Court is not the only appointments to the federal court system. Individuals in Congress who want to block individuals from taking their positions for which they have been nominated will see the wrath of voters come the next election. Some individuals in particularly in the Democratic Party are up for election in states where Trump won handily and if they want to maintain their positions they need to think whether they want to anger those individuals for which they will be asking for their votes.
The decisions which have been handed down by some courts have been overruled by higher courts but not all of them. Every federal judge regardless of where their position needs to honor the Constitution and stop legislating from the bench. Granted some mistakes can and have been made but our court system is such that there are options to appeal rulings by lower courts. In addition federal courts sometimes overstep their bounds when they rule on issues which are state responsibilities as dictated by the Constitution. Federal courts should not get involved in issues that are the responsibility of state governments. Federal courts should only get into the lawsuits which actually violate federal laws that are on the books. The federal government has specific responsibilities as defined in the Constitution and those that are not listed are the responsibility of the states as identified in Article 10.
Liberal philosophy has no place in our federal court system it is time to honor the Constitution when it comes to accepting cases before them. There are times when lawsuits are brought which purport to identify violations of the Constitution and laws on the books but when looking at the statements the justification does not appear to exist. Our federal court system is overwhelmed with the amount of cases on their dockets and if they only accepted cases for which they have jurisdiction.
