Monday 28th July 2014

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

Comment on this Article:

The Church Needs To Stop Taking Government Money

by ELISE HILTON on FRIDAY, JULY 25, 2014 Phil Lawler at CatholicCulture.org voices what should be obvious: that by taking federal money and grants, the Catholic Church has put herself in a very awkward place. Money from the government always comes with strings attached,…Continue Reading

U.S. Considering Refugee Status for Hondurans

By FRANCES ROBLES and MICHAEL D. SHEARJULY 24, 2014 Hoping to stem the recent surge of migrants at the Southwest border, the Obama administration is considering whether to allow hundreds of minors and young adults from Honduras into the United States without making…Continue Reading

Marco Rubio To Take On Abortion and Gay Marriage in Catholic U Speech

Senator Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) plans to take on social and cultural issues in the latest installment of his policy speeches outlining a new conservative agenda. “Senator Rubio will discuss the values needed for economic success in the 21st century: values like…Continue Reading

USCCB Chairmen Respond To ‘Unprecedented and Extreme’ Executive Order

The executive order prohibits “gender identity” discrimination, a prohibition that is previously unknown at the federal level, and that is predicated on the false idea that “gender” is nothing more than a social construct or psychological reality that can be…Continue Reading

Dallas-Fort Worth Catholic leaders appeal for legal help in border crisis

Dallas Bishop Kevin Farrell (center) and Fort Worth Bishop Michael Olson on Monday asked for volunteers to assist with a “humanitarian crisis.” By DIANNE SOLÍS Staff Writer dsolís@dallasnews.com Published: 21 July 2014 10:32 PM Updated: 22 July 2014 12:21 AM Dallas Catholic…Continue Reading

Iraq Catholic leader says Islamic State worse than Genghis Khan

By Dominic Evans and Raheem Salman BAGHDAD (Reuters) – The head of Iraq’s largest church said on Sunday that Islamic State militants who drove Christians out of Mosul were worse than Mongol leader Genghis Khan and his grandson Hulagu who…Continue Reading

CHRISTIAN HOLOCAUST UNDERWAY IN IRAQ, USA AND WORLD LOOK ON

When U.S. troops invaded Iraq in 2003, there were at least 1.5 million Christians in Iraq. Over the last ten years, significantly in the last few months with the emergence of ISIS, that figure has dropped to about 400,000. In a…Continue Reading

Vancouver Catholic Schools Adopt Transgender Policy

James Keller, The Canadian Press Published Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:20PM EDT Last Updated Thursday, July 17, 2014 7:24AM EDT VANCOUVER — Catholic schools in Vancouver have adopted a policy that could allow transgender students to use the pronouns, uniforms…Continue Reading

New Catholic Bishops Say Civil Disobedience OK If For Common Good

Newly appointed auxiliary bishops, two Catholic clergymen suggest Occupy Central could be just, while third weighs in on reform report St Two auxiliary bishops newly appointed by the Vatican have spoken out about the Occupy Central campaign, saying the church supports…Continue Reading

Skeptics And The Claims Of The Catholic Church Seventeen Reasons Scoffers Ought To Rethink Catholicism, If They Really Thought About It

July 11, 2014 05:09 EST By Thomas M. Doran In today’s world, isn’t it crazy to appeal to scoffers to consider Catholicism? Why would a rational modern man or woman in the 21st century be attracted to what the world and…Continue Reading

The Obama Administration’s Border-Crisis Plan B: Use the Catholic Church

The federal government reaches out to a California diocese to help shelter illegal immigrants in California. By Ryan Lovelace In order to avoid future clashes with the citizens of Murrieta, Calif., over attempts to transfer illegal immigrants there, the Obama administration has turned to…Continue Reading

A New Low For Liberals: Attacking Catholic Nuns Over Hobby Lobby

I’m a big fan of absurdity in politics. But even absurdity has its limits, and the National Organization for Women has surpassed it in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision inBurwell v. Hobby Lobby. As part of its full-throated…Continue Reading

Untitled 5 Untitled 2

Attention Readers:

  Welcome to our new website. Readers who are familiar with The Wanderer know we have been providing Catholic news and orthodox commentary for over 145 years in our weekly print edition. Now we are introducing the online daily version of our print journal.


  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 subscribe 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 145 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

'From our friends at The Foundry'


Today . . .

Pope’s Angelus Address, Sunday July 27th

pope361

“Everything makes sense when you find this treasure, which Jesus called “the Kingdom of God,” that is, God reigning in your life, in our lives.” Vatican City, July 27, 2014 (Zenit.org) At 12pm today, Pope Francis appeared at the window of the study in the Apostolic Palace to pray the Angelus with faithful and pilgrims gathered in St. Peter’s Square. Here below…Continue Reading

The Day Of The Hawk

By PATRICK J. BUCHANAN The bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie was premeditated mass murder. Qadhafi was taking revenge for Reagan’s raid on Tripoli in 1986. The downing of KAL 007, flying from Anchorage to Seoul, was mass murder in the second degree. Seeing an aircraft intrude into Russian air space, Soviet officers brutally…Continue Reading

Will John Roberts Decide A “State” Is Not A “State”?

By TERENCE P. JEFFREY The Supreme Court may soon need to decide whether the federal government can be considered a “state” in our federal republic in the same sense that Iowa, Wyoming, and Wisconsin are states. On the face of it, this question may seem absurd. In fact, given any level of reflection, it is…Continue Reading

Assisted Suicide In England… Life And Death Under Debate

By FR. JOHN FLYNN, LC (Editor’s Note: Fr. Flynn is a columnist for ZENIT News Agency, which provided this commentary. All rights reserved.) +    +    + A bill to legalize assisted suicide has been introduced into Britain’s House of Lords by Lord Falconer, previously lord chancellor under Labor Prime Minister Tony Blair, and it is…Continue Reading

Anglican Women Bishops — An Obstacle To Unity?

By FR. DWIGHT LONGENECKER (Editor’s Note: Fr. Dwight Longenecker is an American who has spent most of his life living and working in England. He studied theology at Oxford University. He was eventually ordained as an Anglican priest and served as a curate, a school chaplain in Cambridge, and a country parson on the Isle…Continue Reading

Homosexuality And The Future Of Marriage

By JOHN F. KIPPLEY (Editor’s Note: John F. Kippley is the author of Sex and the Marriage Covenant: A Basis for Morality and other books and articles. With his wife Sheila, he is a coauthor of Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach. The commentary below is reprinted with permission from his blog at johnkippley.com. All…Continue Reading

Advertisement

Our Catholic Faith (Section B of print edition)

A Leaven In The World . . . Iraqi Christian Witness In Face Of Genocide Inspires

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK “O Lord, my God, in thee have I put my trust; save me from all them that persecute me, and deliver me. Lest at any time he seize upon my soul like a lion, while there is no one to redeem me, nor to save” (Psalm 7). The words of the psalm express the perennial…Continue Reading

Is The Rosary A Prayer Of “Vain Repetitions”?

By RAYMOND de SOUZA, KM Part 4 The Pharisee and the publican — improvised prayer and repetitive prayer: “Two men went up to the Temple to pray, the one a Pharisee and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and began to pray thus within himself: ‘O God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of men,…Continue Reading

The Characteristics Of Faith

By DON FIER Faith, or the obedience of faith, was characterized in last week’s installment on the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) as man’s most fitting and proper response to God’s self-revelation. Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ, concisely defines this assent to all God has revealed as “the free submission to God’s Word because its truth is guaranteed by…Continue Reading

Catholic Replies

Q. Jesus says that we are to learn from Him, He who is meek and humble of heart. But Jesus was not always meek and humble of heart. He talked back to the Scribes and Pharisees, He drove the moneychangers out of the Temple, He talked back to the Sanhedrin, He wasn’t bashful about claiming to be the Son of…Continue Reading

Jesus Walks Through Trials With Us

By FR. ROBERT ALTIER Eighteenth Sunday In Ordinary Time (YR A) Readings: Isaiah 55:1-3 Romans 8:35, 37-39 Matt. 14:13-21 In the second reading today St. Paul asks the question of what can separate us from the love of Christ. He then gives a few examples of what people might think will separate us from God; anguish, distress, persecution, famine, nakedness,…Continue Reading

Cast A Gauntlet – Sola Scriptura: Part 1

Catholic Heroes . . . St. Alphonsus Liguori

By CAROLE BRESLIN Part 1 Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ, having read the works of St. Alphonsus Liguori, took him as a mentor. It is not surprising, then, that Fr. Hardon taught his students, “If you are not encountering the cross, you are not doing God’s work.” Such were the lives of saints such as St. Teresa of Avila, St.…Continue Reading

Catholic Heroes… St. Benedict

By CAROLE BRESLIN Every month the Apostleship of Prayer publishes the intentions of the Holy Father: one for a universal intention and one for an evangelical intention. In June 2014, the evangelical intention was that Europe may rediscover its Christian roots through the witness of believers. The advent of Christian civilization coincided with the advent of Western civilization. The Benedictine…Continue Reading

What to Do If Your Boyfriend Wants You to Get an Abortion?

by Krisi Burton Brown | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 2/20/14 4:00 PM Washington, DC (LiveActionNews) — Note: This article is for any girl or woman who is feeling pressured into having an abortion. If you are a guy who is trying to find out how to stop an abortion, please see this article written for dads. 1.  Stand your…Continue Reading

It’s Time to Build Schools, from the Ground Up

February 13, 2014 by Anthony Esolen   It might have been worth repairing, if it had once been noble and beautiful, or at least conceived in an orderly way, for ordinary human purposes. But it wasn’t. It was constructed upon false principles. Its walls looked like those of a bad factory. It smelled like a warehouse. It could be terribly…Continue Reading

Why I am Pro-Life

February 4, 2014   Pro-Lifers   By Therese Recinella   Editor’s note. This tribute was posted on Therese Recinella’s Facebook account. She is graciously allowing us to reprint it in NRL News Today.   There are many things that I could say about my Dad, but what I want people to know is this: My parents faithfully raised 8 children…Continue Reading

Fathers . . . The Essential Role of the Father

Posted on February 10, 2014 by The Catholic Gentleman 13 Comments   Divorce rates skyrocketing; adultery rampant; non-married cohabitating couples; children abandoned by their fathers or mothers; “same-sex unions” adopting children and calling this the “modern family”; pornography invading homes, leading to powerful addictions and total alienation from other members of the family: all of this is a bird’s eye view…Continue Reading

How Much is One Billion Dollars?

This article appeared in the March 20, 1941 issue of The Wanderer. (Well, 70 years later we can add 15 trillion into the example.) Here’s a simple and homely illustration of what one billion dollars amounts to: Suppose we take an imaginary boy, aged 15 years, and assign to him the task of counting one billion dollars in one-dollar bills.…Continue Reading

Planned Parenthood

This article appeared in The Wanderer, April 3, 1941.  (WOW, Look what we have 70 years later.) A group which calls itself the National Committee for Planned Parenthood has begun a nationwide campaign to have the promotion of birth control included in State and national health programs. The committee—which, according to propaganda sheets reaching our desk has a branch in…Continue Reading

Questions of Non-Catholics . . . Answered by Father Richard Felix, O.S.B.

Reprinted from The Wanderer April 10, 1941 Why Does God allow us to be tempted? God allows us to be tempted so that we may prove our attachment to him and merit a higher place in heaven. Temptations are the lot of all men; they are the battle ground upon which heaven is won or lost. “The kingdom of heaven…Continue Reading