Our country was founded under the rule of law, not men. Is this true anymore? A judges rulings are to be based on established law and yet cases are decided by judges, appealed to higher courts and even to the Supreme Court because the original decision is over turned.
Even at the highest level,, the Supreme Court, decisions are seldom unanimous. Is justice served in a 5 to 4 verdict after the reversal of prior verdicts? Whether justice is served, or not, the verdict becomes the law of the land under the Constitution.
Why are cases reversed and why aren’t the verdicts unanimous? Why does one judge render a verdict based on his interpretation of the law and upon appeal his verdict is overturned at the next level? There are several possible reasons I can fathom. Laws may not be written clearly which leaves them open to interpretation. The judge rendering the verdict is basing his interpretation of the law on his personal biases instead of the intent of the law. Judges attempt to “write new law” based on their world view and /or biases.
When a court case reaches the Supreme Court it is because there is a constitutional principle involved. When the time arrives where cases are decided by the judges on the Supreme Court based on the judges personal philosophies instead of what is intended in the written document, the Constitution we will no longer have rule of law but instead we will have rule of man.
I think we have arrived at that time and have been there for decades, if not longer. Based on the record of decisions they have made the Supreme Court justices are labeled liberal or conservative. But the document they are interpreting is neither liberal nor is it conservative.That document, the Constitution, is the rules governing a contract between we the people and the institution we have selected to rule us.
In contract law if one party to a contract does not fulfill the obligations of the contract the contract is broken; the contract is null and void. The government that We the People of the United States instituted is not obeying the terms of the contract We agreed to and is using duress to hold us to what they tell us are the new terms of the contract.
16384total visits,17visits today