Saturday, March 05, 2005

Damned Cato Institute

Bad enough that these guys hate Social Security, but now this in the L.A. Times. Here's the money quote:

"Still, the judiciary, no less than the executive and legislative branches, must be held accountable. Unreviewable power is always dangerous. The best means of responding to these concerns is to appoint judges to fixed terms rather than for life. Ten or 12 years would allow extended service while ensuring turnover."

Ah, yes. Doug Bandow, who wrote this op-ed (which I originally read during my vacation), speaks of the Constitution, and the life terms that are enshrined in it. If Bandow had bothered to read further into the Constitution (or perhaps he conveniently left this part out), it provides for impeachment of judges. I believe that is a review. As well, the Supreme Court reviews lower court decisions if it sees an abuse of judicial power or a decision that in no way conforms with the law.

Impeachment has been used on judges before. It's an option that isn't used often, but I do not believe we see that many abuses in the system. The Cato guys hate judicial activism, as they have pointed out many times in the past. I wonder, despite current writers' praise, how the Cato people back in 1954 felt about Brown v. Board of Education. That was an "activist" decision, too.

Friday, March 04, 2005


Yeah, I get home at 7 am after taking the red-eye back from LA. Slept through the flight, but home and time change keeping me from sleeping. I have so much to catch up on, thank God I don't have to work today. I'll be back posting probably by tomorrow. BTW, did everyone enjoy West Wing as much as I did on Wednesday?