It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
One of the fatal flaws in the concept of "limited" government is the judiciary. Endowed with the compulsory monopoly of the vital power of deciding disputes, of ultimately deciding who can wield force and how much can be wielded, the government judiciary sits as an unchecked and unlimited tyrant.
Pledged to preside over the rule of law, law that is supposed to apply to everyman, the judges themselves are yet above the law and free from its sanctions and limitations. When clothed in the robes of his office, the judge can do no legal wrong and is therefore immune from the law itself.
...
the United States Supreme Court ruled, in 1872, that judges were immune from any damage suits for any "judicial acts" that they had performed — regardless of how wrong, evil, or unconstitutional those acts may have been. When clothed in judicial authority, judges can do no wrong. Period. Recently a case of an errant judge has come up again — because his action as a judge was considered generally to be monstrous and illegal. In 1971, Mrs. Ora Spitler McFarlin petitioned Judge Harold D. Stump of the DeKalb County, Indiana, Circuit Court to engage in a covert, compulsory sterilization of her 15-year-old daughter, Linda Kay Spitler. Although Linda was promoted each year with her class, Mrs. McFarlin opined that she was "somewhat retarded" and had begun to stay out overnight with older youths. And we all know what that can lead to.
Judge Stump quickly signed the order, and the judge and mamma hustled Linda into a hospital, telling her it was for an appendicitis operation. Linda was then sterilized without her knowledge. Two years later, Linda married a Leo Sparkman and discovered that she had been sterilized without her knowledge. The Sparkmans proceeded to sue mamma, mamma's attorney, the doctors, the hospital, and Judge Stump, alleging a half-dozen constitutional violations.
All of these people, in truth, had grossly violated Linda's rights and aggressed against her. All should have been made to pay, and pay dearly, for their monstrous offense. But the federal district court ruled otherwise. First, it ruled that mamma, her lawyer, and the various members of the "healing professions" were all immune because everything they did had received the sanction of a certified judge. And second, Judge Stump was also absolutely immune, because he had acted in his capacity as a judge, even though, the district court acknowledged, he had had "an erroneous view of the law." So, not only is a judge immune, but he can confer his immunity in a king-like fashion even onto lowly civilians who surround him.
...
Originally posted by Starbug3MY
I totally agree. The Supreme Court has been legislating from the bench according to their own whims for a long time. One reason they can do this is because they are appointed for life. I think there should be term limits, and they should be elected by the vote of the people.
Originally posted by Starbug3MY
I totally agree. The Supreme Court has been legislating from the bench according to their own whims for a long time. One reason they can do this is because they are appointed for life. I think there should be term limits, and they should be elected by the vote of the people.
Originally posted by Starbug3MY
I totally agree. The Supreme Court has been legislating from the bench according to their own whims for a long time. One reason they can do this is because they are appointed for life. I think there should be term limits, and they should be elected by the vote of the people.
Originally posted by 4nsicphd
Originally posted by Starbug3MY
I totally agree. The Supreme Court has been legislating from the bench according to their own whims for a long time. One reason they can do this is because they are appointed for life. I think there should be term limits, and they should be elected by the vote of the people.
You mean like in West Virginia where the Supreme Court is bought and owned by Massey Energy with campaign contributions? www.law.cornell.edu...