A Wider Question.
Thinking about the events of the past week got me to thinking. Especially in the light of Libertarian complaints. I want to get this on the blog right now so I don't forget to address this later (or not so much address as think it publicly).
Libertarians are viewing the Terri Schiavo controversy in terms of a governmental power grab. IMO, a narrow view of events. I think this is over the top as there are a lot of questions that have to be answered before it can be likened to a power grab and in any event the lives of the citizenry is a governmental priority we should all support.
The wider question is one of the proper balance of power between the three branches. For instance it is clear the Federal courts usurped constitutional power. Given that situation it is my opinion it would have been within the rights of the executive to make sure the will of congress was carried out. There was a tension between the three branches (at Jiblog thinks if Governor Bush would have used his executive authority to rescue Terri it would have immediately cost him his job) that should have the Libertarians smiling.
The problem is now we assume the judge has the final say in what happens. The judge may have the final say but that is all they have, a say. The congress has the bucks and the executive the enforcement duties. There are plenty of examples in history where the judgments of justices were ignored and in my opinion there are times when they should be ignored.
The judges in our system have now become so used to having the final say they no longer feel constrained by the constitution, the constitution means whatever they say it means.
Libertarians are viewing the Terri Schiavo controversy in terms of a governmental power grab. IMO, a narrow view of events. I think this is over the top as there are a lot of questions that have to be answered before it can be likened to a power grab and in any event the lives of the citizenry is a governmental priority we should all support.
The wider question is one of the proper balance of power between the three branches. For instance it is clear the Federal courts usurped constitutional power. Given that situation it is my opinion it would have been within the rights of the executive to make sure the will of congress was carried out. There was a tension between the three branches (at Jiblog thinks if Governor Bush would have used his executive authority to rescue Terri it would have immediately cost him his job) that should have the Libertarians smiling.
The problem is now we assume the judge has the final say in what happens. The judge may have the final say but that is all they have, a say. The congress has the bucks and the executive the enforcement duties. There are plenty of examples in history where the judgments of justices were ignored and in my opinion there are times when they should be ignored.
The judges in our system have now become so used to having the final say they no longer feel constrained by the constitution, the constitution means whatever they say it means.
posted by Marcus Aurelius at 10:04 PM
<< Home