Sunday 28th May 2017

Home » Featured Today » Currently Reading:

Neither Left Nor Right, But Catholic… The Supreme Court: Activism And Abdication

February 18, 2014 Featured Today No Comments

By STEPHEN M. KRASON

(Editor’s Note: Stephen M. Krason is a professor of political science and legal studies and associate director of the Veritas Center for Ethics in Public Life at Franciscan University of Steubenville. He is also cofounder and president of the Society of Catholic Social Scientists. He is the author of several books, including The Transformation of the American Democratic Republic [Transaction Publishers: 2012], and most recently published an edited volume entitled Child Abuse, Family Rights, and the Child Protective System [Scarecrow Press: 2013].
(This column originally appeared in Crisismagazine.com and the Krason column appears monthly in The Wanderer. All rights reserved.)

+    +    +

Serious Catholics and political conservatives since the 1950s have strongly criticized the Supreme Court for making public policy and acting as a kind of “super-legislature” to further a leftist sociopolitical agenda, instead of interpreting the law and judging. We have seen such judicial lawmaking on pornography, abortion, legislative reapportionment, sodomy laws, and the list could go on.
While this has certainly been a valid and much-deserved ongoing criticism of the court, cases in each of its last three terms indicate a new, contrary problem: over-deference to the political branches on both the federal and state levels.
In 2011, the court decided the companion cases of Camreta v. Greene and Alford v. Greene, which concerned whether a child protective system (CPS) operative and a law enforcement official who backed him up could be sued under federal civil rights laws for an aggressive interrogation of a nine-year-old girl — which under international norms possibly constituted psychological torture — to get her to say that her father abused her.
Along with many other organizations, the Society of Catholic Social Scientists filed an amicus curiae brief supporting the girl’s claim (I drafted the brief), mostly because we wanted to focus the court’s attention — as we tried to do over a decade before in the important parental rights case of Troxel v. Granville — on the CPS’s systemic misconduct that in one article I called “a grave threat to the family.” In Camreta/Alford, the court showed no interest in parental rights or in addressing CPS abuses, or even in making their abusive operatives legally accountable in any way for their outrageous actions; it used strained procedural norms to avoid the question.
The decision must be understood as simply unquestioning deference to an executive agency, in this case a state one. The prerogatives of government trumped parental rights, the family, and even abusive behavior against children by agencies supposedly set up to stop abuse. It was not entirely surprising, since in Troxel the court did not think parental rights deserving of the highest standard of constitutional protection.
One wonders if the court kept in mind the insistence of The Federalist Papers that while government needed to have enough power to carry out its rightful responsibilities, it also had to keep itself under control.
In 2012, the court handed down its crucial decision about the Obamacare law, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. The court engaged in legal and intellectual gymnastics to uphold the law. While a majority of the justices agreed that Congress had no power under either the commerce clause — whose broad interpretation has been a major basis for expending federal power since the New Deal — or the necessary and proper clause to regulate economic inactivity (that is, requiring people to buy health insurance), the court still upheld the crucial individual mandate.
While the text of the law stated specifically that failure to purchase health insurance would incur a financial penalty — the drafters apparently went out of their way to avoid calling it a “tax” — the court’s majority nevertheless decreed it to be a tax in order to save the law. While the leftists on the court almost certainly voted to uphold the law for policy reasons — for decades the left has looked to the court to decree its agenda into existence — Chief Justice Roberts’ deciding vote, which caused many to scratch their heads, probably reflected the tendency of most “conservative” judges and legal scholars to just almost instinctively defer to the legislative.
Scalia and the other “conservatives” may have jumped off the bandwagon on this one because of the other central principle of “conservative” jurisprudence: federalism. After all, Obamacare for the first time in a major way got the federal government into insurance. Of course, federalism rightly triumphed when the court struck down the portion of the law requiring states to expand Medicaid.
While conservatives can at times almost absolutize federalism — in contrast to the stress on the principle of subsidiarity in Catholic social teaching, which is more flexible and realistic in acknowledging that activities at times have to go to the higher level — this was a welcome part of the decision, since along with the broad view of the commerce power federal grants-in-aid programs have for decades been the other main reason for the excessive expansion of federal power.
The confusion and turmoil resulting from the Obamacare law have already become almost legendary. Instead of such ready deference to Congress, the court’s “conservatives” should have rethought their longstanding view — forged, to be sure, with the good intention of trying to stop the judicial legislating embraced by their leftist colleagues and the classical liberal jurists of an earlier time — that they cannot strike down laws because the legislative branch acted unwisely or even bungled.
A statute whose meaning and contents “we’ll have to wait to learn about,” to paraphrase Nancy Pelosi, hardly meets any traditional legal or moral criteria for being a valid law. Moreover, the upheaval — the word is not an exaggeration in light of what has happened in the past several months — was foreseeable with this 2,700-page law whose parts do not even fit together well. The justices should have recalled what Federalist 78 said about the courts needing to act to ensure moderation. They have a role “in mitigating the severity and confining the operations” of “unjust and partial laws” and “to moderate the immediate mischiefs” of laws that have been passed.
So, contrary to the criticisms of some conservatives that the courts have no role in trying to correct social wrongs, Federalist 78 says they should go further than that and even respond to unjust laws.
The same excessive notions of deference to the political branches and federalism appear in the court’s U.S. v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry decisions of 2013 on same-sex “marriage.” While Windsor went against the norm of deference to the legislative, since it struck down a provision of the Defense of Marriage Act as it pertained to same-sex “married” couples in states that had legalized such “marriages,” it did so because of a convoluted deference to state decision-making (an absolutist view of federalism).
While the leftist justices were perhaps prepared to invent a fundamental constitutional right to same-sex “marriage,” most of the “conservatives” clearly were prepared to accept such a radical, unprecedented redefinition of marriage if states duly enact it. What we have is a leftist jurisprudence promoting immorality and a “conservative” jurisprudence of amorality. Something like same-sex “marriage” would have been as unthinkable to our Founding Fathers as the proposition that two plus two equals five.
This likely would not have been seen as a valid exercise of state power, any more than the federal government viewed Mormon polygamy in Utah Territory that way. Hollingsworth might be understood as a sweeping deference to state politicians — both legislators and executives — irrespective of the people’s wishes. Not only did it let stand a lower federal court’s overruling of Proposition 8 against same-sex “marriage” adopted by a citizen referendum, but it also allowed state officials to abdicate their responsibility to defend the law in court.
The people enacted a law that the officials didn’t want, and then would not allow lawyers representing the people to have standing to defend it. In effect, they amended the California constitution’s provisions on referenda by permitting recalcitrant officials to veto the people’s decision. Two “conservative” justices, Roberts and Scalia, were part of the majority, and doubtless some notion of federalism influenced their thinking.
This is deference with abandon. How does it square with Federalist 78’s insistence that “the power of the people is superior to both” the legislative and judicial branches — and Alexander Hamilton doubtless meant the executive, as well.
Further, contrasting these decisions and the court’s Lawrence v. Texas decision (2003) that legalized sodomy with Camreta/Alford — and Troxel before that — makes one see that a near-majority or sometimes majority of the court will, first, elevate ersatz rights to a greater importance than such fundamental traditional rights as those of parents and, second, afford special protections to groups whose status as disadvantaged minorities or categories of people at all is in question — not only are homosexuals on average in a better economic situation than the general population, but the evidence is that homosexual orientation is far from rigid and immutable — while it allows the family, a natural institution whose health is crucial for the state, to be imperiled.
At one time, early in the 20th century, the court held that parental rights trumped the state’s childrearing preferences. Now, if sexual liberties do not trump all else for the court, they are certainly high on the constitutional priority chart. In the Obamacare case, the court could not see its way to defending a majority against a public policy with truly serious implications for one of the most intimate of human concerns, physical health — and possibly (with the likelihood of rationing on the horizon) life itself.
Nevertheless, it was ready to give a self-styled minority — spearheaded by a juggernaut political movement — at least part of what it wants, even though this departed from age-old human understanding and has enormous social implications in the long-term.
Conservatives have been correct, by and large, to get the court to stop legislating. However, as I wrote in an article in the mid-1990s — which was republished in my book, The Public Order and the Sacred Order (2009) — one should not condemn “judicial activism” across the board. It depends on what is meant by the term. If judicial activism means creating ersatz constitutional rights, it is to be rejected.
On the other hand, it should be embraced if it means upholding traditional, clear constitutional principles when the political branches no longer want to do so, as we see in the Obama era — or even if it means resorting to the true natural law (as opposed to some imitator, such as the notion of substantive due process that in different eras has been the rationale for absolutist notions of private property and abortion rights) when necessary and when something in the black-letter Constitution cannot more immediately be pointed to. (The “conservative” Scalia probably refused to view parental rights as “fundamental” in Troxel because they do not appear in so many words in the Bill of Rights.)
After all, as the great constitutional scholar Edward S. Corwin and others showed, the Constitution came out of the natural law tradition. Nor is reliance on natural law an open door to judicial arbitrariness, as often claimed (especially by certain “conservative” jurists and legal scholars, many of whom have really bought into a positivist jurisprudence).
As Catholic legal scholar David Forte has written, the natural-law judge is more likely than the positivist judge to be restrained. At a time of unprecedented governmental intrusion into people’s lives and public officials who seem to think that traditional constitutional principles are outmoded, the courts may become an increasingly crucial institutional force to rely on.
All things being equal, a regimen of judicial deference to the political branches makes sense, but the times call for more careful discernment about when to defer and a reassessment of the view of Scalia-type judicial “conservatives” that traditional rights not specifically in the text of the Constitution or Bill of Rights are somehow not valid or fundamental.
Nor should they continue to think that respect for federalism means that anything should be allowed to go, even if it deeply offends the natural law and the norms of civilization, just because it was adopted at the state level.

Share Button

2017 The Wanderer Printing Co.

Trump Is Pushed and Pulled on Climate Change, A Year After Pledging to Cancel Paris Deal

(CNSNews.com) – Exactly one year after pledging in a speech to “cancel” the Paris climate agreement, President Trump will attend a Group of Seven summit Friday in Sicily where he’s expected to come under sustained pressure from his counterparts to…Continue Reading

St. Louis archbishop resists law requiring Catholics to hire abortion activists: ‘We will not comply’

LOUIS, Missouri, May 24, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis, led by the Most Reverend Robert J. Carlson, has drawn a line in the sand for the protection of innocent human life. In February, the city…Continue Reading

Planned Parenthood Closing Multiple Abortion Clinics in Iowa After State Defunds It

The abortion chain Planned Parenthood announced plans Thursday to close four Iowa clinics as a result of a new state law that defunds it. At the end of June, Planned Parenthood facilities in Burlington, Keokuk and Sioux City, Iowa will…Continue Reading

Graduates walk out on Pence at Notre Dame commencement

SOUTH BEND, Ind. (AP) — Dozens of graduates and family members silently stood and walked out Sunday as Vice President Mike Pence began his address at Notre Dame’s commencement ceremony. Pence, the former governor of Indiana, was invited to speak…Continue Reading

Trump nominates Callista Gingrich for ambassador to the Vatican

President Trump has nominated Callista Gingrich, the wife of former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), as ambassador to the Holy See, the White House announced Friday. The nomination comes just five days before Trump is set to meet with Pope Francis…Continue Reading

The murder case of Blessed Oscar Romero has been reopened

San Salvador, El Salvador, May 19, 2017 / 01:14 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- A nearly 40 year-old murder case was reopened this week to properly prosecute the suspected killer behind the Salvadorian archbishop’s martyrdom. Because of an amnesty law that prohibited…Continue Reading

Notre Dame Protest of Pence Twists Catholic Social Teaching

This Sunday, vice president Mike Pence will return to his home state of Indiana to deliver the commencement address at the University of Notre Dame. For the third time in several years, the school’s graduation ceremony will be plagued by…Continue Reading

Planned Parenthood is Ditching the Failed “Pro-Choice” Label. Here’s Why

The “pro-choice” label has not been working out so well for the abortion chain Planned Parenthood. The labels pro-choice and pro-life have been used for decades to help identify people’s positions on abortion, but young adults seem to be moving…Continue Reading

Bishop Conley: The Pro-Choice Political Dictatorship of Relativism

In 2005, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who would soon be elected Pope Benedict XVI, preached that “we are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and…Continue Reading

These Republicans Voted Against the Bill to Defund the Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz

Republicans in the House of Representatives yesterday voted for a Reconciliation bill that would defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business. This was the second attempt to get enough votes on the reconciliation bill that would not only defund the nation’s…Continue Reading

Cecile Richards Comes Unglued After House Defunds Planned Parenthood: Republicans Hate Women

Planned Parenthood abortion business president Cecile Richards it’s not happy that the House of Representatives voted yesterday to defund Planned Parenthood. The main response of the CEO of the nation’s biggest abortion conglomerate can be summed up in three words:…Continue Reading

Despite pro-life provisions, healthcare bill raises serious concerns

Vatican City, May 4, 2017 / 05:27 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- The House passed a repeal of the Affordable Care Act and a replacement health care bill on Thursday, but one bishop warned that the new bill poses serious problems for…Continue Reading

Untitled 5 Untitled 2

Attention Readers:

  Welcome to our website. Readers who are familiar with The Wanderer know we have been providing Catholic news and orthodox commentary for 150 years in our weekly print edition.


  Our daily version offers only some of what we publish weekly in print. To take advantage of everything The Wanderer publishes, we encourage you to su
bscribe to our flagship weekly print edition, which is mailed every Friday or, if you want to view it in its entirety online, you can subscribe to the E-edition, which is a replica of the print edition.
 
  Our daily edition includes: a selection of material from recent issues of our print edition, news stories updated daily from renowned news sources, access to archives from The Wanderer from the past 10 years, available at a minimum charge (this will be expanded as time goes on). Also: regularly updated features where we go back in time and highlight various columns and news items covered in The Wanderer over the past 150 years. And: a comments section in which your remarks are encouraged, both good and bad, including suggestions.
 
  We encourage you to become a daily visitor to our site. If you appreciate our site, tell your friends. As Catholics we must band together to rediscover our faith and share it with the world if we are to effectively counter a society whose moral culture seems to have no boundaries and a government whose rapidly extending reach threatens to extinguish the rights of people of faith to practice their religion (witness the HHS mandate). Now more than ever, vehicles like The Wanderer are needed for clarification and guidance on the issues of the day.

Catholic, conservative, orthodox, and loyal to the Magisterium have been this journal’s hallmarks for five generations. God willing, our message will continue well into this century and beyond.

Joseph Matt
President, The Wanderer Printing Co.

Untitled 1

Enter Comments Below

This Weeks Comments And Letters . . .

Culture Of Life 101 . . . “An Introduction To The Problem Of Euthanasia”

By BRIAN CLOWES Part 2 (Editor’s Note: Brian Clowes has been director of research and training at Human Life International since 1995. For an electronic copy of chapter 23 of The Facts of Life, a 150-page treatise on all of the aspects of euthanasia, e-mail him at bclowes@hli.org.) + + + We have covered the definitions of the varieties of…Continue Reading

Today . . .

Cardinal Müller on Amoris Laetitia, Paul Ehrlich, Antonio Spadaro and the Three Dismissed Priests

muller

Yesterday, 25 May, the Catholic channel EWTN aired an interview of Raymond Arroyo’s The World Over which was conducted a week ago with Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). In this interview – which was conducted in English – the German cardinal touches upon several important matters which are of interest to the larger Catholic world. When Raymond Arroyo asks Cardinal Müller about the post-synodal exhortation…Continue Reading

‘Comfortable’ Catholics are ‘unwilling’ to see dangers facing Church: Scholar

ROME, May 23, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Too many Catholics are caught up in a “comfortable” Catholicism that makes them unwilling, and even unable, to see the “grave problems” currently besetting the Church, said a renowned theologian and one of the world’s top Catholic experts on the Church Fathers. “Most Catholics seem to live their life on a sort of comfortable zone, just the way that a lot of bishops live in a sort of safety-first…Continue Reading

Catholic bishops denounce a Trump budget championed by Mulvaney – a lifelong Catholic

On the day that President Donald Trump met with Pope Francis in Rome, a top administration official defended a proposed budget that America’s Catholic bishops have strongly criticized for hurting the poor. The Trump administration official in the hot seat: budget chief Mick Mulvaney, a lifelong Catholic who grew up in Charlotte. Speaking Wednesday to the House Budget Committee, Mulvaney called Trump’s budget plan a “moral” document that puts “taxpayers first.” And he defended the…Continue Reading

Pope Francis Receives US President Donald J. Trump

Pope Francis received President of the United States of America, Donald Trump, today, May 24, 2017, at about 8:30 a.m. in the Apostolic Palace, before Francis’ weekly General Audience in St. Peter’s Square. The meeting was broadcasted by Vatican Television and can be watched via this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVCm1-toVFg According to a statement released by the Holy See Press Office, the discussions, which lasted about 30 minutes, were cordial.

Trump budget completely defunds abortion providers, and Planned Parenthood is furious

May 23, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Pro-abortion feminists are bemoaning and pro-lifers are celebrating President Trump’s 2018 budget proposal that would withhold all federal funds from abortion-provider Planned Parenthood. Breitbart reported yesterday that Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Mick Mulvaney told the media on Monday that the new budget would defund the abortion business, but only if the new Republican healthcare legislation passed recently by the House is also passed by the Senate and…Continue Reading

The Blessed Virgin And St. Joseph… A Marriage Truly Made In Heaven

By JAMES MONTI For several centuries there was on the liturgical calendars of several religious orders a feast day that few know of today — Desponsatio beatae Mariae Virginis — the Espousal of the Blessed Virgin Mary, a celebration of the marriage of Our Lady to St. Joseph. Although the Sacred Scriptures recount scarcely more…Continue Reading

A New Birth Control Commission?

By JOHN F. KIPPLEY (Editor’s Note: At this point, reports about a possible new birth control commission are unconfirmed. This commentary first appeared on http://nfpandmore.org/wordpress/.) + + + The week of May 13th started wonderfully with widespread efforts to honor the Blessed Virgin Mary as Our Lady of Fatima. The work week was quickly dimmed,…Continue Reading

Wanda Poltawska… The Stubborn Insistence On Being Human

By DONALD DeMARCO The city was Toledo, Ohio. The year was 1990. The venue was the dining room in a private home. The audience consisted of several pro-life people, including myself. The speaker was Wanda Poltawska who was relating a series of events in her life that we were most privileged to hear. In 1962,…Continue Reading

A Movie Review… “Outcasts” And True Social Justice

By REY FLORES “A bold example of social justice in action” — Follow the cameras of Grassroots Films, the Award-Winning producers of The Human Experience and Child 31, on an unexpected journey across the globe. Travel to the prisons of Central America, walk the dark city streets of London, New York, and Ireland’s most treacherous…Continue Reading

Kentucky Printer Can Refuse LGBT Message

LEXINGTON, Ky. — A Kentucky Court of Appeals ruling on May 14 affirmed a printer who objected to promoting a message for Lexington’s Gay and Lesbian Services Organization (GLSO) which conflicted with his sincerely held religious beliefs. Hands On Originals’ managing owner, Blaine Adamson, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, refused to print T-shirts for the…Continue Reading

Advertisement

Our Catholic Faith (Section B of print edition)

Penance As A Laborious Kind Of Baptism

By DON FIER Sin, its dire consequences, and man’s continual need for conversion are realities that are often dismissed or even outrightly denied in modern secularized societies enamored, as they are, with materialistic pursuits. As noted last week, recent Roman Pontiffs, beginning with Pope Pius XII in 1946, cite as an underlying reason for this troubling phenomenon a “loss of…Continue Reading

Catholic Replies

Editor’s Note: In his parish bulletin recently, Fr. George Rutler of the Church of St. Michael in New York City recalled the famous words of the great jazz singer Al Jolson: “You ain’t heard nothing yet” and compared them with the words of Jesus: “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now” (John…Continue Reading

Discover God’s Gifts And His Will

By FR. ROBERT ALTIER Pentecost Sunday (YR A) Readings: Acts 2:1-11 1 Cor. 12:3b-7, 12-13 John 20:19-23 In the first reading today we hear about the Holy Spirit descending upon the apostles as they were gathered in prayer. The event was marked by some extraordinary phenomena: the noise like a driving wind filling the house and the tongues of fire.…Continue Reading

The Canonization Mass For Jacinta And Francisco . . . Pope Francis Says: “Dear Pilgrims, We Have A Mother”

(Editor’s Note: Pope Francis on May 13 canonized Jacinta and Francesco Marto, as the highlight of his May 12-13 Apostolic Pilgrimage to Fatima. Below is the Vatican translation of the Pope’s homily during the Mass, as provided by ZENIT News Agency. (It is followed by the text of Pietro Cardinal Parolin’s homily at the vigil. Earlier at the vigil, the…Continue Reading

A Leaven In The World… 25th Ordination Jubilee Solemn High Mass And Celebration

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK (Editor’s Note: The staff of The Wanderer congratulates Fr. Cusick on his upcoming 25th anniversary of Ordination.) + + + Thank you for reading my column so faithfully over the years and for all that you have done to support the apostolate of The Wanderer. As we mark the 25th anniversary of my June 6,…Continue Reading

Catholic Heroes… St. Peter Sanz And Companions

By CAROLE BRESLIN In 1748, the Viceroy of Peking with great frustration asked, “What are we to do with these men? Their lives are certainly irreproachable. . . . Their jailers and their families become their disciples and embrace their religion. To prolong this state is only to give them the opportunity of increasing the number of Christians.” Thus Peter…Continue Reading

Catholic Heroes… Pope St. Celestine V

By CAROLE BRESLIN After the death of Pope St. John Paul II, faithful Catholics rejoiced at the election of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger as the next Vicar of Christ. The German prelate took the name of Benedict XVI for two reasons: in memory of Pope Benedict XV who led the Church during the turbulent times of World War I, seeking peace…Continue Reading