Former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor says she fears growing assault on judicial indepen

[Piggybank Cop]

Former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor says she fears growing assault on judicial independence

ASSOCIATED PRESS


SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 4 — Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said she fears judges are under growing political attack nationwide.

''I'm increasingly concerned about the current climate of challenge to judicial independence,'' O'Connor told a gathering of state judges from around the country Friday. ''Unhappiness with judges today is at a very intense level.''
The judiciary is the weakest of the three branches of government, she said, and therefore the one with ''the greatest need to be defended.''
The executive and legislative branches have become the attackers, so ''the principal defenders are going to have to be the people of this country,'' with lawyers taking the lead, she said.
O'Connor, who retired in January after 24 years on the nation's highest court, spoke just days before South Dakota voters consider the ''Jail 4 Judges'' initiative. It would create a citizens' grand jury that could authorize lawsuits or criminal prosecutions against judges based on their rulings.
Colorado voters will decide whether to limit judges on the state's highest courts to 10 years in office, a measure that would remove five of the state's seven Supreme Court justices within two years.

They wouldn't be in so much trouble if they just did their job.

[dlux]

Seems to me that judges have plenty of protection when they allow officers to come into court armed.
As for their judicial independence maybe if they didn't push a liberal agenda and legislate from the bench the public would not push to remove lawsuit protection.
I also think it is funny that lawyers need protection from suit. How are their coworkers going to make any money that way.

[me again]

The judiciary is the weakest of the three branches of government, she said, and therefore the one with ''the greatest need to be defended.''

I'm not attorney, so I may not be qualified to respond to this, but...

When the Supreme Court of the United States strikes down voter-initiated laws that are passed by Congress, I can hardly agree that the Supreme Court is the weakest of the three.

On the contrary, it seems that the courts of our country are engaging in "judicial activism" to countermand the wishes of the majority. The basis of this judicial activism seems to happen when courts begin misinterpreting the original intent of the constitution e.g. misinterpreting the intent of the founding fathers -- and their ruling stands without any counterbalance. That's judicial activism.

There are no checks & balances to keep the Supreme Court in check. They are out-of-control. Who can stop them? Congress??? [no] The president??? [no] Nobody can stop them, but they can stop Congress and the president. Therefore, former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is completely wrong when she says that the judiciary is the weakest of the three branches of government and is the one with the greatest need to be defended.

[TheOldRhino]

They wouldn't be in so much trouble if they just did their job.

You mean to suggest that the Supreme Court be held accountable for it's actions? Have you bumped your head? We can't even get people who spill hot coffee on themselves to be held accountable for their actions.

This country's going in the shitter.