Home

home
Stay Informed

stay informed
ideas

ideas
media library

media library


get involved




Login:
Password:
Register | Forgot login info


Abraham Lincoln Quote

Let us be diverted by none of those sophistical contrivances wherewith we are so industriously plied and belabored–contrivances such as groping for some middle ground between the right and the wrong.

ideas > Fair or Law

Fair or Law
I am currently reading an excellent biography about Chief Justice Earl Warren who served on the Supreme Court in the 1950s, 60s, and I believe the 70s. He was the Chief Justice during all the major rulings on civil rights, discrimination, criminal justice, and electioneering cases that changed America greatly. While it is debatable whether or not the Court’s rulings under his guidance were all or in part successful or not, he was a seemed like a great man, a man devoted to fairness. Unfortunately, this was his major weakness and flaw as a judge. A judge’s role, especially a Supreme Court judge, is not to be fair, but to rule on the Constitutionality of the law. I have searched the Constitution and have found no reference to a concept of fairness. The danger of trying to implement fair solutions that are not based in the Constitution were the same dangers that our founding fathers saw and fought the war of 1776. Supreme Court judge’s ruling based on fairness usurps the voice of the people and seeks to impose one very small select group of people’s views upon the masses without a vote or say in the matter. This is no better than the king of England telling the Colonial people what to do. Fairness is such a tricky word. What is fair to one man is not fair to another. The beauty of the Constitution is that it takes fairness out of it. It seeks to spell out exactly the roles and responsibilities of the federal and state government in the lives of the people. There is nothing in there about fairness. The Constitution is not to be used to impose someone’s idea of fairness. By imposing fairness upon people to appease the conscience of some justice is unconstitutional. Justices are only to rule on the Constitutionality of a law, not on the fairness of the law. If the law violates the equal protection clause, then they are to strike it down, but nowhere in that discussion should fairness be talked about. Fairness is an arbitrary judgment and arbitrary judgments are the judgments that kings force upon people. We live in a democracy where the people are to make up the laws and the rules, where the people are to decide what is fair or not, not 4 justices on the Supreme Court. Justice Warren made many good rulings, but he also made many bad rulings clouded by his idea of what was fair or not. His role, as is the role of all judges, is to keep their personal ideas about fairness out of the court room and rule on the constitutionality of the law. To rule based on fairness is judicial activism, which is nothing more than imposing the ideas and will of a few people upon the majority, which is exactly why the founding fathers fought the Revolutionary War in the first place. The King of England imposed arbitrary economic rules upon the American people because he believed it was fair to the people of England without allowing the colonists to vote on it.
Contact us