Sunday, March 15, 2009

Courts shouldn't decide Minnesota Senate

Our society should live up to a very important principle: everything possible should be decided by people who are accountable to the public. This certainly should extend to elections. The Minnesota Senate race was an extremely close election decided by a few hundred votes.

Depending on the standards, on the legal maneuvering, and possible underhandedness by either or both sides, no one will ever get a count that will satisfy the losing side. Therefore, those in charge should certify a winner, and the U.S. Senate should decide to seat whomever they want.

We need to get out of the habit of handing over important decisions to judges.

Judges should determine what the Constitution says, and what the properly enforced law is.

Determining who had the most legal votes should not be a part of any court's judgement.

A court should hear cases about whether the government followed the law, but not enforcing the law, and not rewriting the law as they see fit.

It seems only those on the losing sides of court cases believe in judicial restraint. So in effect, many of the court cases are political extentions of ideological battles rather than the exercise of the rule of law.

As Democrats we should strive to place the Judiciary system in its' proper place. Any idea that is worthy should be able to win in the court of public opinion and therefore through the elected branches of government.

Sure, there are exceptions, but right now judges are feeling empowered to rule on virtually any topic, often in ways that constrict the will of the people.

Courts should not regularly be in position to tell other branches of government what to do.
And they definitely shouldn't be in position to determine who populates the other branches.

No comments: