Just one year into the Trump 47 Administration, it feels like every headline involving a federal judge is another story of obstruction and activism by a leftist ideologue, but allow me to shine a light on some great judges who give us hope for a return to sound jurisprudence in America!
When a federal three-judge panel blocked Texas’s newly drawn congressional maps last year, one member of that panel, 5th Circuit Judge Jerry E. Smith, issued a dissent so forceful it immediately drew national attention. Judge Smith, a Reagan appointee with nearly four decades on the federal bench, called the ruling and the process an extraordinary abuse of judicial power. In his words, “In 37 years as a federal judge… This is the most blatant exercise of judicial activism that I have ever witnessed.” Smith accused the majority of rushing out a massive 160-page opinion without giving him a meaningful chance to respond, calling the process deeply improper and outside normal judicial practice. His dissent runs more than 100 pages and reads less like a routine disagreement and more like a warning about the judiciary overstepping its constitutional role.
Another recent example brings us to 6th Circuit Judge Amul Thapar. In December, Judge Thapar penned an excellent concurring opinion, ultimately agreeing with his fellow panel members on the banning of firearm ownership by illegals, but urging his Democrat-appointed colleagues to go farther in articulating that constitutional rights are reserved exclusively for U.S. citizens. Judge Thapar wrote: “It’s no accident that the Constitution starts with ‘We, the People.’ … The founding generation understood that legitimate government derives its authority from the consent of the governed.” “Properly read,” Thapar continues, “our text, history, and tradition squarely foreclose [the alien’s] claim. They reveal that ‘the people’ refers to the citizens of the United States who consented to its government.”
Judge Smith and Judge Thapar have hit the nail on the head, revealing partisan judicial maneuvers and fundamental constitutional truths for what they are! Both of these federal judges opinions should serve as a rallying point for conservatives. Good judges still serve, and we must bring attention to them!
Phyllis Schlafly wrote often about judicial activism, and one of our best antidotes against it is to spotlight good judges and demand more of the same in federal nominations! Stay informed and join the fight for constitutional judges with us at PhyllisSchlafly.com, again that’s PhyllisSchlafly.com. Thanks for listening and join us tomorrow for another Phyllis Schlafly Report.
