Sunday 29th May 2016

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

2016 The Wanderer Printing Co.

34% of “Pro-Choice” Women Who See This Viral Video Turn Against Abortion

A new four-minute viral video is causing over a third — 34 percent — of “pro-choice” women surveyed to view abortion “less favorably.” And 28 percent of pro-choice women who watched the video stated there should be more restrictions on…Continue Reading

‘Biblically wrong’: Oklahoma lawmakers urge Obama’s impeachment over transgender bathrooms

Lawmakers in Oklahoma have introduced legislation calling for President Barack Obama to be impeached because of his administration’s support for transgender bathrooms. Another bill calls for a declaration of emergency in the state. In a measure called Senate Concurrent Resolution…Continue Reading

Oklahoma legislature passes bill making it a felony to perform abortions

Lawmakers in Oklahoma approved a bill Thursday that would make performing abortions a felony and revoke the medical licenses of most physicians who assist in such procedures. This sweeping measure, which opponents described as unconstitutional and unprecedented, now heads to…Continue Reading

Unanimous Win for Little Sisters of the Poor at Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, D.C. –Today the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the government cannot fine the Little Sisters of the Poor.  The Supreme Court vacated the lower court rulings against the Little Sisters, accepting the government’s admission that it could meet…Continue Reading

Conservatives outraged over Obama transgender directive to public schools

The Obama administration’s directive Friday that every public school provide transgender access — or face the loss of federal funds — drew swift and strong condemnation from conservatives, with one public official blasting it as presidential “blackmail.” The administration’s directive…Continue Reading

Pro-Life Leaders Decry Scandals, Urge Catholic Colleges to Reject Culture of Death

Concerned by recent high-profile events at Catholic colleges featuring pro-abortion leaders — including Planned Parenthood’s Cecile Richards, Bill Clinton, Wendy Davis and Vice President Joe Biden — 31 Catholic and pro-life leaders joined a statement urging Catholic colleges to “stand firm…Continue Reading

ACLU launches campaign to strip Catholic hospitals of federal funds

NEW YORK, May 9, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Catholic hospitals across the U.S. are “withholding emergency care” and denying “essential health services,” the ACLU is alleging in a new campaign. They also inflict harm on “transgender and gender-non-conforming patients” “when seeking…Continue Reading

Harvard Law Professor Says Pro-Life Christians Should be Treated Like Nazis

Every day, it seems, the United States is becoming a more hostile environment for people with pro-life and conservative positions. Abortion activists constantly challenge pro-life laws, stall abortion industry investigations, force religious objectors to pay for abortions and attack life-affirming…Continue Reading

Obama plans new push for transgender rights in schools

The divisive and politically combustible issue of bathroom access for transgender individuals is about to become further inflamed, as the Obama administration is expected in coming weeks to aggressively reinforce its position that transgender student rights are fully protected under…Continue Reading

Cardinal Burke: Notre Dame is Wrong

Notre Dame’s Great Scandal: Honoring Vice President Biden By Thomas McKenna, President of Catholic Action for Faith and Family: The University of Notre Dame has announced that they intend to confer the Laetare Medal, an honor given to Catholics “in…Continue Reading

DoJ to North Carolina: You Have Until Monday to Reverse Bathroom Bill

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory received a letter from the Department of Justice that gives him until Monday to reverse his state’s controversial bathroom bill, reports The Hill. The DoJ said the law is in violation of the federal Civil…Continue Reading

Lavender Graduations Harmful to Students at Catholic Colleges

At least eight Catholic colleges across the country are hosting “lavender graduations” this spring — many of them as part of an annual campus tradition — to celebrate and honor students with same-sex attraction (SSA) or who identify as lesbian,…Continue Reading

Newsmax

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 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 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

Enter Comments Below

This Weeks Comments And Letters . . .

Commentary

This Weeks Comments And Letters . . .      

Today . . .

Planned Parenthood sponsors bill to make it illegal to record and post undercover footage

A bill making its way through the California State Assembly, sponsored by Planned Parenthood, seeks to make it a crime to publish conversations with certain health care providers, notably those associated with abortion facilities. California has already squashed the rights of pro-life pregnancy centers, demanding they offer abortion as an option to their clients, despite their pro-life mission. Now, Planned Parenthood and CA Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez think it’s a fine idea to prosecute someone from posting a “photo…Continue Reading

South Carolina governor signs ban on abortion for babies who feel pain

CHARLESTON, May 26, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – South Carolina has joined 13 other states that forbid abortions to be performed on unborn children capable of feeling pain. As expected, Governor Nikki Haley, a Republican, signed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act on Wednesday. The law restricts abortion to the first 19 weeks of pregnancy. “South Carolina took a courageous stand to protect women’s health and safety in limiting abortion at a point at which the risks…Continue Reading

Pope Francis: Perseverance in prayer needed, but not “magic wand”

pope908

(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis on Wednesday said “prayer is not a magic wand.” He was speaking during his weekly General Audience in St. Peter’s Square. The Pope was discussing the Parable of the Unjust Judge – also known as the Parable of the Persistent Widow – from the Gospel of Luke. In the parable, the persistence of a widow forces the unjust judge to grant her request for justice, “so that she will not eventually…Continue Reading

Catholic College Presidents Hopeful for Resolution in HHS Mandate Challenge

The presidents of two Catholic colleges involved in the U.S.Supreme Court challenges to the HHS mandate applauded the Court’s recent decision to vacate all lower court rulings and expressed their hope that a positive resolution for religious freedom would soon be reached. “I am pleased that Supreme Court has offered us a way forward which doesn’t require us to participate in the provision of the services which

Pope Francis: Christians live God’s love with joy, astonishment

(Vatican Radio) No Christian can exist without joy: that’s what Pope Francis said in his Homily at Mass Monday morning in the chapel of the Santa Marta guesthouse. The Pope stressed that even through life’s difficulties, the Christian knows he can trust in Jesus and find hope. The Pope also reminded the faithful they should not allow riches to dominate their lives because they ultimately lead to sadness. Christians live in joy and amazement because…Continue Reading

Havana: The Potemkin Village Of The 21st Century

By ALBERTO MARTINEZ PIEDRA According to the media, it is often heard that many Americans are interested in traveling to Cuba because, as relations between the jewel of the Caribbean and the United States warm, they “want to see the island before it changes.” And they make this statement with a certain degree of optimism.…Continue Reading

Rocky Homilies

By DEACON JAMES H. TONER (Editor’s Note: Deacon James H. Toner, Ph.D., serves at Our Lady of Grace Catholic Church in Greensboro, N.C.) + + + The Holy Father’s admonition in Amoris Laetitia that priests must understand that the moral law should not be thrown at people as if it were so many stones (n.…Continue Reading

Restoring The Sacred… A Procession To The Ends Of The Earth

By JAMES MONTI Several weeks ago, after attending the Easter Vigil at a nearby seminary, and the emptied chapel had fallen silent, I began to hear the sound of the sacring bell being rung in the sacristy. Puzzled by this, I wondered whether the seminarians were perhaps trying to repair the bell. But then from…Continue Reading

Is Scarborough Shoal Worth A War?

By PATRICK J. BUCHANAN If China begins to reclaim and militarize Scarborough Shoal, says Philippines President Benigno S. Aquino III, America must fight. Should we back down, says Aquino, the United States will lose “its moral ascendancy, and also the confidence of one of its allies.” And what is Scarborough Shoal? A cluster of rocks…Continue Reading

Cicero In An Election Year

By JUDE P. DOUGHERTY In the midst of the turmoil that characterized the mid-decades of the last century, the English jurist Sir Patrick Devlin wrote, “If a society’s laws are based on a particular worldview and that worldview collapses, the laws themselves will crumble.” His 1965 book, The Enforcement of Morals, is still worth reading…Continue Reading

Advertisement

Our Catholic Faith (Section B of print edition)

The Marvel Of The Catholic Church Miracles And The Saints

By RAYMOND DE SOUZA, KM Part 2 “And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand’.” “Heal the sick, raise the dead, and cleanse the lepers, cast out demons” (Matt. 10:7-8). It is evident that our Lord Jesus Christ gave to His disciples the power to perform miracles, and many of them did just that. Not…Continue Reading

The Church’s Liturgy — Who Celebrates?

By DON FIER There is an ancient Latin saying in the Church that eloquently expresses what her members believe of the efficacy of the sacraments and their relationship to faith: lex orandi, lex credendi (“the law of prayer is the law of faith”). Each of the seven sacraments, as we saw last week, can be classified in various categories. Yet…Continue Reading

Catholic Replies

Q. My husband and I are wondering when to say the “Amen” after the Lord’s prayer is prayed during Mass. I believe “Amen” should be said after we say “deliver us from evil.” — J.W., Georgia. A. Although it is correct to say “Amen” at the end of the Our Father while saying it outside of Mass, for example, while…Continue Reading

God’s Prophet

By FR. ROBERT ALTIER Tenth Sunday In Ordinary Time (YR C) Readings: 1 Kings 17:17-24 Gal. 1:11-14a, 15a, c, 16a, 17, 19 Luke 7:11-17 In the first reading today we hear about the death of the son of a widow with whom the Prophet Elijah stayed when he was passing through that region. The woman had been very good to…Continue Reading

Cardinal Mueller Reminds The Church Of Her Marriage Doctrine

By MAIKE HICKSON Part 2 (Editor’s Note: We are publishing this commentary from Gerhard Cardinal Mueller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, as reported by Maike Hickson, in two parts. The first part appeared in last week’s issue. (OnePeterFive graciously gave The Wanderer reprint permission for this article. All rights reserved. See: www.onepeterfive.com/cardinal-muller-reminds-church-marriage-doctrine/. (Dr. Hickson, born…Continue Reading

Catholic Heroes . . . St. Augustine Of Canterbury

By CAROLE BRESLIN A Celtic cross erected in 1884 marks the spot in Ebbsfleet, Thanet, East Kent, where St. Augustine of Canterbury is said to have landed in 597. While some form of Christianity in England may be traced back to the times of the Roman occupation, it did not become a strong presence until the arrival of St. Augustine,…Continue Reading

Catholic Heroes . . . St. Crispin Of Viterbo

By CAROLE BRESLIN In March 1986, Pope John Paul II visited the Basilica of Our Lady of the Vine (Oak) located in Tuscany, Italy, to proclaim our Lady patroness of the Diocese of Viterbo. The tradition of visiting the image of Our Lady of the Oak began 600 years ago in 1417 when Mastro Baptist Magnano Iuzzante commissioned an image…Continue Reading

COMPLETE 3 PART Interview With Cardinal Burke . . . Insights On The State Of The Church In The Aftermath Of The Ordinary Synod On The Family

Cburke3

By DON FIER Part 1 (Editor’s Note: His Eminence Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke, Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, recently traveled from Rome to the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in La Crosse, Wis., a magnificent place of worship which he founded and dedicated. (His Eminence graciously granted an extensive interview to The Wanderer during which he…Continue Reading