"To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all [moral] questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed," wrote Thomas Jefferson, "one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy."
In casting his concerns over a high court that could pronounce moral judgments and bind the morality of the people, Thomas Jefferson cautioned that "our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control."
Thomas Jefferson was in agreement that there was a need for a final arbiter of the constitutional principles, but Jefferson proclaimed that "the ultimate arbiter is the people of the Union."
Thursday, March 17, 2005
Tell me, if Thomas Jefferson, by way of a letter to an acquaintance, penned forever the legal doctrine of "the Separation of Church and State" (SOCAS), why are not the following pronouncements, and many others by the same man, found to have the force of legal doctrine?
Tell me, why do these men and women, disguised as robed sages, genuflect to Jefferson's SOCAS but will not humble themselves before his warnings against their becoming unelected despots and oligarchs?
The reason this is so important to me is that the oppressed and lost of the world need a politically free America ... many souls will burn in hell for eternity if we do not stop this runaway judiciary!
See an earlier post on this here ...