Judicial deference to legislative, or administrative, "findings" does
indeed present a constitutional challenge. Now it seems all Congress has to
do is state it "finds" a relation to "interstate commerce" to legislate a
general police power to do anything.

But it may also point to a defect in constitutional design that did not make
the judiciary sufficiently independent. A judge who considers a
constitutional obligation to overturn a statute or administrative decision
is chilled by the prospect of not being promoted, of being prosecuted and
losing his pension, of being disbarred, of being shunned by colleagues, of
having the court budgets cut so that the dockets become even more overloaded
than they are, of being tax audited, of being harassed by investigators who
pry into his private life and that of his family and friends, and a host of
other ways that pressure can be brought to bear on those who don't play
ball. Being reversed is barely significant by comparison.

I have discussed this problem with many lawyers and judges, and discern a
pattern of deep-seated corruption that is so familiar to most of them that
many aren't even aware of it as corruption. It is just "legal realism" writ
large.

We may need to look to reforms on the ways judges are selected and promoted.
Both election, and appointment by one branch and confirmation by the other,
are subject to undue influence and abuse. The ancients, confronted with the
problem, adopted the method of sortition, or random selection by lot, for
brief periods of time, the way trial jurors are supposed to be selected. It
is the only method we have found that might avoid undue influence. There are
some efforts to partly implement it through doing things like random
assignment of cases to judges, but that can be easily subverted and cases
steered to the "right" judge. The trick would be to find a way to select
judges by sortition that would ensure some minimal level of competence. For
more on this see http://www.constitution.org/elec/sortition.htm .

Joseph E. Olson wrote:

Unfortunately, it reduces the "constitutional" rights subject to it to merely trivial bumps in the road to legislative abolishment.

---------------------------------------------------------------- Our efforts depend on donations from people like you. Directions for donors are at http://www.constitution.org/whatucando.htm Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 512/374-9585 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to