Time: Mon Mar 03 08:46:24 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA10832; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 08:10:17 -0700 (MST) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 08:40:36 -0800 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: C-NEWS: Voters Be Ignored: Wall St. Journal <snip> > >http://www.termlimits.org/beignored.shtml > >Voters Be Ignored >(This editorial appeared in the Wall Street Journal of Feb. 28, 1997.) > >Term limits have had a rough time of late. More than the required >two-thirds of House Members voted for one or another Constitutional >amendment on term limits this month, but the most any single amendment >could muster was a bare majority of Members. But the biggest threat to >term limits isn't posed by evasive politicians. It comes from judges who >second-guess the voters and strike down term limit laws. > >The most recent example comes from Arkansas. Last October the Arkansas >Supreme Court declared unconstitutional an initiative that would identify >term limit opponents on the ballot. It ordered state officials not to >even count votes cast for it. The U.S. Supreme Court then voted 7-to-2 to >intervene and allow voters to be heard. More than 61% of Arkansans voted >yes. This week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to hear a case on the >merits of the new law. It will likely settle the matter after several >state courts have ruled on the validity of such laws. > >We wish the Supreme Court's restraint on reviewing state laws had been >followed by federal District Judge Claudia Wilken, who is about to rule >on a suit against California's term limit law for state legislators. >Everyone thought the California Supreme Court had settled the issue when >in 1991 It voted 6-to-1 that the imposition of term limits was fully >justified by he public's interest in "protecting against an entrenched, >dynastic legislative bureaucracy." > >Now that dynastic bureaucracy has sallied forth from its legislative >Death Star to strike back at the voters. Last year, state legislators >sued again in federal court arguing that the term limit law and its ban >on termed-out legislators returning to the same office violated their >free speech and as associational rights. California Attorney General Dan >Lungren argued that those issues had already been dealt with by the state >Supreme Court, but Judge Wilken, a Clinton appointee, ignored his >objections and gave term limit opponents a second day in court. > >During preliminary arguments, Judge Wilken made it clear she was in >inclined to rule that the law's lifetime limit might violate the U.S. >Constitution. If she did, she would then have to strike down the entire >law. Legislators who would otherwise have to step down in 1998 would >break out the champagne glasses. > >Judge Wilken concluded the trial more than four months ago, and has yet >to issue her decision. Should she strike down a state term limit law, it >would be an act of incredible judicial arrogance. When in the 1970s West >Virginia Governor Arch Moore challenged his state's term limit law, the >U.S. Supreme Court rejected his petition because there was "no >substantial federal question" at issue. For 50 years the U.S. >Constitution has imposed a lifetime limit of two terms on anyone serving >as President. No one has ever challenged that ban. Should a mere state >legislator have more right to hold office than the nation's highest >elected official? President Clinton may show more than an academic >interest in Judge Wilken's decision. > >The larger point here is that judges at all levels are increasingly >assuming decision-making power held by legislatures and citizens. Judges >are currently blocking California's Civil Rights Initiative from taking >effect and promoting gay marriage in Hawaii, positions that clearly go >against the wishes of a majority of voters. It's true that voters >sometimes must be restrained by courts from enacting blatantly foolish >laws. But in democracy that power must be used sparingly or else the >courts will begin to lose their credibility. The next step might be a >campaign for term limits on judges. >------- >To subscribe to c-news, send the message SUBSCRIBE C-NEWS, or the message >UNSUBSCRIBE C-NEWS to unsubscribe, to majordomo@world.std.com. Contact >owner-c-news@world.std.com if you have questions. > > ======================================================================== Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. : Counselor at Law, federal witness email: [address in tool bar] : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU web site: http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this ========================================================================
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail