Most of the Republican presidential candidates want to wipe away lifetime tenure for federal judges, cut the budgets of courts that displease them or allow Congress to override Supreme Court rulings on constitutional issues.
Any one of those proposals would significantly undercut the independence and authority of federal judges. Many of the ideas have been advanced before in campaigns to court conservative voters.
This time, though, six of the eight GOP candidates are backing some or all of those limits on judges, even though judges appointed by Republican presidents hold a majority on the Supreme Court and throughout the federal system.
A group that works for judicial independence says the proposals would make judges “accountable to politicians, not the Constitution.”
Bert Brandenburg, executive director of the Justice at Stake Campaign, said, “Debates like these could threaten to lead to a new cycle of attempts to politicize the courts.”
Only the former governors in the race, Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Jon Huntsman Jr. of Utah, have not attacked federal judges in their campaigns.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has been the most outspoken critic of the courts. He would summon judges before Congress to explain their decisions and consider impeaching judges over their rulings.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, in his book “Fed Up,” has called for an end to lifetime tenure for federal judges and referred to the high court as “nine oligarchs in robes.”
Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, in criticizing Iowa judges who decreed same-sex marriage legal in the state, described judges as “black-robed masters.” Mrs. Bachmann said Congress should prevent the courts from getting involved in the fight over same-sex marriage, among other high-profile social issues.
Rep. Ron Paul of Texas has advocated cutting the jurisdiction of federal courts and has introduced a bill to that effect in the House. A judge’s violation of Mr. Paul’s proposed “We the People Act” would be “an impeachable offense.”
Mr. Paul told Iowans in March that the country ought to come up with a way for voters to remove federal judges from office, much like several states that have retention elections for state judges. (Iowa voters ousted three of the judges in the same-sex-marriage ruling from office in a November 2010 referendum.)
At a tea party forum in South Carolina in September, Republican candidate Herman Cain joined Mrs. Bachmann and Mr. Gingrich in endorsing legislation that would overturn the high court’s rulings declaring that women have a constitutional right to abortion. The proposal challenges the widely held view that Congress can’t overrule the court’s constitutional holdings.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania has been particularly critical of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has a preponderance of liberal Democratic appointees. “That court is rogue. It’s a pox on the Western part of our country,” Mr. Santorum said at a tea party event in February. He pledged to sign into law a bill abolishing the appeals court.
Mr. Gingrich, too, has reserved special criticism for the 9th Circuit, saying that by squeezing its budget, Congress could force the court’s judges to give up their law clerks and even turn off the lights in their courtrooms and offices.
At the Values Voters Summit in Washington in early October, Mr. Gingrich also objected to last year’s ruling that struck down a ban on gay marriage that was approved by California voters (a ruling currently on hold and under appeal), and an order by a judge in San Antonio barring public prayer at a high school graduation.
Copyright © 2022 The Washington Times, LLC.