Impeachment, term limits, judicial-retention elections and new Constitutional amendments to give majorities in Congress or the states power over a rogue Supreme Court decision were discussed Wednesday at a Senate hearing on ways to address judicial activism.
“Much to my disappointment, this past term, the [Supreme] Court crossed a line, continued its long descent into lawlessness to a level that I believe demands action,” said Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican and chairman of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on oversight, agency action, federal rights and federal courts.
With some of its decisions — including this year’s gay-marriage ruling and the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion ruling — it declared itself a “superlegislature” and “the rulers of 320 million Americans,” said Mr. Cruz.
John Eastman, law professor at Chapman University and chairman of the board of the National Organization for Marriage, testified that the balance of power between the three branches of government has shifted and the federal judiciary is now “unchecked.”
Constitutional amendments — allowing a majority of states and a supermajority vote of each chamber of Congress to override a ruling by the Supreme Court — could rectify that imbalance of power, said Mr. Eastman.
Sen. Christopher Coons, Delaware Democrat, countered that any “liberal activism” in the Supreme Court “is, I think, demonstrably false,” and that he and his allies didn’t agree with many rulings, including those on voting rights and campaign spending.
“We cannot decry ’judicial activism’ and create a constitutional crisis every time that a big case comes out against us,” said Mr. Coons. “We are blessed in this country, in my view, with the finest judiciary in the world,” and the Court’s insulation from politics is “precisely” what has allowed it to operate so well.
• Cheryl Wetzstein can be reached at cwetzstein@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.