Adam Graham
The rule of law v. the rule of judges
By Adam Graham
We've repeatedly heard the phrase "the rule of law" used to defend the killing of Terri Schiavo. The media and politicians tell us that whenever a judge rules, it's the job of the people to shut up and obey the court order. The legislature and the executive can do nothing once the court has spoken. Judges have the final word on every matter.
Is that what the rule of law really means?
The rule of law is a tradition born of the excesses of thousands of years of the rule of man. Kings, chiefs, and priests had absolute authority to act on their own whims and they could punish and kill individuals whenever they wanted. The rule of law means that we're governed by the written law, not the wishes of men.
The problem with the Schiavo case and the rulings of many of our courts today is that they are about the rule of judges and not the rule of law. The prevailing view of legal interpretation says that we have a "living constitution." This doctrine means that the courts can reinterpret the Constitution as they see the need.
Thus, the plain language of the Constitution or a law is ignored, as judges peer into the Constitution like a crystal ball, looking for new rights to declare and to find how old ones can be done away with or restricted. Thus, while courts are expanding special rights for homosexuals, they've recently authorized restrictions on freedom of political speech before an election. We've had courts overturn US laws based on the rulings of foreign judges and treaties we've never signed or ratified.
In the Schiavo case, the Florida judge ignored the subpoena of Congress for Terri Schiavo and the federal courts ignored a law that required them to do a complete fresh review of the case. What we saw was the rule of judges. The rule of law was disregarded.
Most judges have been absolutely corrupted by the absolute power they've granted themselves. The Bible tells us that all authority is given from above, but there's more authority than that of judges.
Our legislators have the ability to impeach lawless judges. Our governors and our President holds the executive power to stop encroachments by the judiciary by refusing unlawful orders. They swear an oath before God to defend and protect the Constitution, in effect to protect the rights of citizens, not to mindlessly obey the judiciary.
Courts should not be defied merely because we disagree with their rulings, but when a court shows a pattern of ignoring the law and the rights of citizens, they must be stopped. If judges continue to make up the law as they go along, our rights and our very lives will forever be subject to their ever changing moods, as they insist on compliance with their orders in the name of the rule of law.
© Adam Graham
We've repeatedly heard the phrase "the rule of law" used to defend the killing of Terri Schiavo. The media and politicians tell us that whenever a judge rules, it's the job of the people to shut up and obey the court order. The legislature and the executive can do nothing once the court has spoken. Judges have the final word on every matter.
Is that what the rule of law really means?
The rule of law is a tradition born of the excesses of thousands of years of the rule of man. Kings, chiefs, and priests had absolute authority to act on their own whims and they could punish and kill individuals whenever they wanted. The rule of law means that we're governed by the written law, not the wishes of men.
The problem with the Schiavo case and the rulings of many of our courts today is that they are about the rule of judges and not the rule of law. The prevailing view of legal interpretation says that we have a "living constitution." This doctrine means that the courts can reinterpret the Constitution as they see the need.
Thus, the plain language of the Constitution or a law is ignored, as judges peer into the Constitution like a crystal ball, looking for new rights to declare and to find how old ones can be done away with or restricted. Thus, while courts are expanding special rights for homosexuals, they've recently authorized restrictions on freedom of political speech before an election. We've had courts overturn US laws based on the rulings of foreign judges and treaties we've never signed or ratified.
In the Schiavo case, the Florida judge ignored the subpoena of Congress for Terri Schiavo and the federal courts ignored a law that required them to do a complete fresh review of the case. What we saw was the rule of judges. The rule of law was disregarded.
Most judges have been absolutely corrupted by the absolute power they've granted themselves. The Bible tells us that all authority is given from above, but there's more authority than that of judges.
Our legislators have the ability to impeach lawless judges. Our governors and our President holds the executive power to stop encroachments by the judiciary by refusing unlawful orders. They swear an oath before God to defend and protect the Constitution, in effect to protect the rights of citizens, not to mindlessly obey the judiciary.
Courts should not be defied merely because we disagree with their rulings, but when a court shows a pattern of ignoring the law and the rights of citizens, they must be stopped. If judges continue to make up the law as they go along, our rights and our very lives will forever be subject to their ever changing moods, as they insist on compliance with their orders in the name of the rule of law.
© Adam Graham
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
