An activist court and the rule of law / by kevin murray

The three branches of government in the United States are the Executive, Legislative, and the Judicial.  The Legislative branch is the branch that makes the laws in accordance with the highest law of this land, which is its Constitution.  The Executive branch is the branch that sees that the laws as propagated are executed faithfully throughout this land.  And the Judicial branch is that which interprets the laws so passed and propagated throughout this country.

 

While the Constitution itself, is a document that can be easily read within one hour, the laws so passed and enforced within this nation, including local, county, State, and Federal laws are typically so lengthy and so convoluted, that all of these laws so written probably could not be read within a ten year period, or perhaps even within a given person's lifetime.  Yet, in recognition that all laws passed must be in conformance with the Constitution of this land, and that this is the controlling document of this nation, it would seem to imply that judicial decisions should always take into fair consideration as to whether a particular law is actually Constitutional or not, to begin with.

 

Further to the point, since the Judicial branch is responsible for the interpretation of the laws so propagated within this nation, that Judicial branch must take their responsibility to be the bastion that more than any other branch, should stand up to those that are trying to add to or have accomplished adding on to their power, at the expense of the people.  In other words, power, is something that never seems to satiate certain people as well as certain organizations to the extent that they will not relent until they have all the power that they so desire, and that desire seems to be well-nigh insatiable.  If, then, the Judicial branch of this country will not take a principled stance against overwhelming power, especially when that power is held in the hands of the few and the privileged for the very benefit of the few and the privileged, then this country, despite its many laws, and despite its Constitution, will not stand for the very principles upon which it was founded.

 

This signifies that an activist court in all judicial affairs has its place, rather than the courts and judicial decisions being solely reactionary in their decisions.  In other words, time and time again, it is the judicial branch, that has risen up to the occasion, to make that principled stand that certain specific laws as enacted and enforced at the present time are wrong, and that there is a fair remedy to correct such.  After all, it is human tendency, even when unintentional, for well placed people to push and to augment their power, without necessarily consciously acknowledging such; especially when they have not taken into proper consideration that power that is concentrated into the hands of the few, is going to be highly susceptible to being abused, if it hasn't already been designed to be exactly that.

 

So then it must be acknowledged that the highest power in this land that stands against concentrated and arbitrary power is the Constitution, and the very people that understand that Constitution best, are primarily judicial, in which it is that judicial branch, that must thereby do its patriotic duty to preserve, to protect, and to defend that Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and domestic