A case too far

Thomas Lifson, who does a great job at The American Thinker has another good article on all the different ways that our activist judicial system is facing a perfect storm. He repeats the same point that I posted on earlier which was made by George Nuemayr -- why should the public feel bound by the law when judges do not? Ultimately, this is the most critical point that judges should contemplate when they are inclined to "legislate their own personal policy preferences" (as Justice Scalia describes it).

I wish Lifson had spent more time outlining the extent to which federal judges have taken control of a large number of state and local political functions. He does mention the Kansas City desegregation case which I think may be the most egregious case of judicial overreach since Roe v. Wade. Using the ever expandable argument that jurisdiction implies the judicial power to craft whatever remedies are deemed necessary, the judge completely overhauled the education system. He mandated the construction of new schools and got involved in designing a Taj Mahal high school complete with swimming pool. Since his orders required a great deal of new funding, he ordered that local taxes be increased. No one should be surprised that, on appeal, federal judges decided that the Constitution permits a federal judge to impose local taxes and run local school systems.

This was the culmination of a very long series of cases under which federal judges have taken control of elections, jails, prisons, and school systems all over the country. I think most Americans would be shocked at how far they have gone.

Of course, don't hold your breath waiting for the MSM to tell you.