Conservative judges strike back

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.


The New York Times reports:

A federal appeals court in Atlanta refused…to reconsider the case of Terri Schiavo, with one of the judges rebuking President Bush and Congress for acting ‘in a manner demonstrably at odds with our founding fathers’ blueprint for the governance of free people.’

The judge who rebuked Congress and the Bush administration’s intervention in the Schiavo case was none other than Judge Stanley Birch Jr.—a conservative judge appointed by the first President Bush. Judge Birch went on to note that “legislative dictation of how a federal court should exercise its judicial functions invades the province of the judiciary and violates the separation of powers principle.” Hey, this sounds familiar. Check out what Judge Henry Floyd, a recent Bush appointment, had to say about the administration’s handling of “war on terror” detainee Jose Padilla:

[T]he Court is of the firm opinion that it must reject the position posited by the Respondent. To do otherwise would not only offend the rule of law and violate this country’s constitutional tradition, but it would also be a betrayal of this Nation’s commitment to the separation of powers that safeguards our democratic values and individual liberties.

Judge Floyd’s opinion in the Padilla case actually echoed parts of an opinion written by notoriously conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, challenging the Bush administration to stay within in the law in its prosecution of terrorist suspects. It looks like even the conservative members of the judiciary are tired of being pushed around by the executive branch, and are starting to push back.

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate