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