A More Perfect Union: What We the People Can Do to Reclaim Our Constitutional Liberties (14 page)

ARTICLE 3, THE JUDICIAL BRANCH

“The Lord demands accurate scales and balances; he sets the standards for fairness.”

Proverbs 16:11

F
rom 1983 to 1984 I was the senior registrar in neurosurgery at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital of the Queen Elizabeth II Medical Centre in Perth, Western Australia. One evening that year my wife and I were driving down a long hill. At the base of that hill was a speed trap where the police ticketed just about everyone who picked up speed coming down the hill.

To say that the car we were driving was not capable of speeding would be a drastic understatement. It was a very economical four-cylinder model that was little more than a skateboard with a motor. Nevertheless, an officer stopped us and issued a speeding citation. I protested, stating that my car was not capable of the speed he accused us of, but to no avail. The officer suggested that I meet him in court, which I did.

I was quite sorry that I had gone to court when I witnessed how brutal the judge was. Most of the defendants had
lawyers, and I was there by myself, regretting my decision. When it came time for me to approach the bench and explain my situation, I informed the judge that the police had been using radar equipment that operated on the Doppler effect. This meant that the signal could be substantially degraded by angulation such as we encountered on the hill. After further explanations, the judge simply said, “Case dismissed.” I felt vindicated and happy with the Australian judicial system that particular day.

When the American judicial system works well, the judges also listen to reason. As Article 3 makes clear, the duty of the judicial branch is to interpret the laws that are created by the legislative branch and enforced by the executive branch of government. Its job is to protect the people from overly aggressive executive and legislative branches of government that might from time to time forget that they are in fact the servants of the people rather than the rulers of the people.

The Supreme Court of the United States sits at the pinnacle of the federal judicial system and is responsible for the interpretation of laws. If Congress passes a law that violates the Constitution, the Supreme Court can strike it down. If there’s a question as to how exactly a law applies to a particular situation, the Court rules on that too.

Congress has the right to establish other federal courts that are less powerful than the Supreme Court but still have important duties. Most legal cases are handled in these “inferior” courts, which are any courts whose decisions can be appealed to a higher court. That includes all state courts and all federal courts besides the U.S. Supreme Court.

In order to make sure that judicial officials are not easily intimidated, the Constitution protects their salaries and in many cases gives them lifetime appointments. Unfortunately, this shielding can damage as well as preserve America’s freedoms. Some judges are so protected from the public’s reactions to their judgments that they’ve lost sight of the will of the people. There have been several instances where voters through a ballot referendum chose one thing, only to have judges come along, decide that the voters had no idea what they were talking about, and overturn the will of the voters.

It is unlikely that it was the intention of the founders to give any public official the ability to thwart the will of the people. Although they may have been concerned about mob rule and wanted a judicial system that would prevent that, they also recognized that in many other countries it was assumed that the ruling class always knew better than the people, and they wanted no part of such a system.

Recognizing that judges might abuse their power, the founders included in the Constitution a phrase that would give Congress the ability to remove such judges. They said that judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior.” There is some room for interpretation of what “good Behavior” means, but when one understands that the Constitution was established to protect the will of the people, it becomes clear that it is a serious offense to thwart that will. The vast majority of federal judges are outstanding American citizens who uphold the rights of the people, but courage is required to move against the few bad apples that contaminate the system by ignoring the will of the people.

Federal courts can hear cases concerning the constitutionality of any law; treaties; shipping laws; and federal laws. These courts also have jurisdiction in cases where the involved parties are ambassadors, consuls, public ministers, the U.S. government, state governments in conflict with each other, or a citizen of one state suing a citizen of another. Cases involving foreigners or events occurring in foreign lands but involving American citizens are also within the jurisdiction of federal courts.

The vast majority of federal cases are handled in district courts quite satisfactorily. The Supreme Court does have the right to review the decisions made in all of the inferior courts and to change those decisions if it feels that they were improperly rendered. A case that has been tried in the lower court can be appealed through the appellate system all the way to the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court is incapable of handling all the cases that are appealed due to the sheer volume. The Supreme Court has the ability to select which cases it chooses to hear. Fortunately, the appellate courts just below the Supreme Court, called the United States Courts of Appeals, generally do an excellent job in resolving outstanding issues.

Whenever a person is accused of a serious crime, our Constitution provides the right to a trial by a jury of his or her peers. During the trial the facts are presented to the jury, and both
the prosecuting attorney and the defense attorney make arguments before the jury. In cases of lesser crimes or misdemeanors, the defendant is frequently offered a choice between a trial by judge and a trial by jury.

The jury system works well but is by no means perfect. In medical-malpractice trials, a large portion of the case involves trying to educate the jury on what are sometimes complex medical issues. Victory frequently goes to whoever can put on the best dog and pony show rather than whoever has the facts on their side. This is one of the reasons why medical cases are frequently not even sent to a court in other countries, which have different mechanisms to take care of people who sustain injuries during medical treatment. The National Trial Lawyers, a special-interest group, has made every attempt to thwart the establishment of these kinds of mechanisms in the United States. This is because lawyers benefit financially from the current system. Lawyers and courts are an important part of a fair judicial system, but we clearly need some tort reform and need to invest time and energy in finding more appropriate ways to solve common societal problems.

When a case does go to trial, the Constitution requires the trial to take place in the state and region where the grievance occurred. This makes the likelihood of obtaining a trial by one’s peers, people who actually understand the circumstances, much greater. Once again we see the founders’ commitment to fairness for all citizens.

One of the crimes the Constitution is very clear about is treason. Treason is a crime punishable by death in America, as
well as in many other countries. Because it is such a severe crime, the writers of the Constitution clearly defined the term. They said that treason meant warring against the United States, siding with her enemies, or assisting her enemies. Our founders were very specific about this because they knew that accusations of treason would otherwise be employed to get rid of political enemies.

In the last year or two a number of American citizens have traveled overseas and joined Islamic terrorist groups. This clearly would meet the definition of treason. Unfortunately, the definition of who our enemies are seems to be changing in America. Recently a high-profile income-tax official referred to Republicans as enemies. Others on the far right frequently refer to some Democrats as communists, socialists, or enemies of America. It is important that we tone down the rhetoric and stop allowing ourselves to be manipulated to the point that we believe that our fellow American citizens are enemies or are guilty of treason.

Once someone is convicted of treason, the Constitution is also clear about parameters for the traitor’s punishment. The death penalty is not required and is seldom employed in this country today. The government also may not punish the family of the traitor. In modern America it seems unimaginable to punish the innocent children or relatives of a criminal who has committed treason against the United States. Nevertheless there is historical precedent for such actions in our mother country, Great Britain. The founders added this clause to ensure that we would never repeat the same kind of mistake in our country.

We should be grateful today that we live in a country where justice is valued. We should celebrate the good judges and juries
that protect our liberty. We should make sure that our judges remember that their job is to judge, not to legislate or execute. And, though we should punish treason severely, we should remember that disagreement is not treason. As long as we stick to the principles outlined in Article 3, we will be able to maintain justice in our great nation.

ARTICLES 4–7

“Remind everyone about these things, and command them in God’s presence to stop fighting over words. Such arguments are useless, and they can ruin those who hear them. Work hard so you can present yourself to God and receive his approval. Be a good worker, one who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly explains the word of truth.”

Timothy 2:14-15

I
remember once being thrilled with a brand-new car I had purchased. The vehicle came with many fancy options that kept me occupied. Once I’d played with almost every gadget in the car, I decided to program the garage door opener. To my great dismay, it did not work. I had programmed many garage door openers over the years and felt quite competent in this area, but nothing I did worked. I finally gave up and decided to read the instruction manual, since all else had failed. It took only a minute of reading for me to learn that this door opener required a different method of programming than I had used before. I quickly adopted the new code and solved the problem. If only I had read the manual earlier, I would have saved myself a lot of frustration.

Similarly, many of the problems that we have in our nation could be solved by a careful reading of each of the articles of our Constitution. We may be convinced that we know everything there is to know about our Constitution, but speaking from my own experience, I learn something new almost every time I read it.

The last four articles of the Constitution are brief, but they deal with crucial points. Article 4 deals with the relationship between the states and the federal government. Article 5 outlines the steps to amend the Constitution. Article 6 makes it clear that the Constitution is the law of the land. Article 7 sets in place the steps for ratification.

Article 4 of the Constitution deals with the relationship between the states and the federal government. Each state is to honor all legal actions taken in the other states. Without such a provision, we would be not one nation but fifty. With this provision every American citizen can move freely throughout the fifty states. If jobs are scarce in one state and plentiful in another, an American citizen can simply pull up roots and move to the location where jobs are plentiful. Because the language and culture are relatively uniform throughout the United States, this gives every citizen tremendous flexibility and choice.

You cannot vote in a state election unless you are a resident of that state. Fortunately, becoming a resident is a quick and simple process. All that is necessary is to establish a mailing address that is not a post office box and be able to prove that you actually live in the state. The amount of time that
you are required to live in the state before applying for residency varies.

If the public records from one state were not available to the other states, mass confusion around identities and rights would prevail. If states didn’t recognize marriages from other states, there would be chaos. If they didn’t recognize the judgments of other state courts, people could simply move to a different state to avoid penalties for or consequences of their actions. As it is, the extradition requirement in Article 4 ensures in most cases that a criminal captured in another state will be returned to the state in which the crime was committed. Sometimes criminals have committed unlawful acts in multiple states and the issue of which state they should be returned to becomes quite complex. Fortunately, the relationships among various law-enforcement entities in the various states are strong and cordial.

In one case the friendly relationships among the states helped an evil cause, but fortunately a constitutional amendment put an end to the problem. One clause in Article 4 refers to slaves who had escaped from their owners, requiring that a slave who escaped to a free state be returned to his owner in a slave state if he was found. Fortunately, the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, making this clause meaningless.

Another clause in Article 4 is also no longer necessary, though it has not been abolished. When the Constitution was written, the United States was in expansion mode, and its ambitious leaders wanted to ensure that the expansion was not at the expense of existing states. Thus they required that new states be added only with the approval of the existing states. Their intentions were realized, and the nation grew rapidly while the integrity of each state remained strong.
Today we are not looking to expand our territory, so the clause is rarely invoked.

Article 4 also has a clause giving Congress the power to govern U.S. territories that have not yet become states. The Louisiana Purchase, for example, encompassed a huge amount of territory that needed to be under the jurisdiction of the government. Once the Louisiana Territory, the Northwest Territory, and other such land parcels were developed into states, they fell under normal congressional regulation. This clause also allows Congress to set aside national parks and care for them, as well as build bridges, dams, and other projects to improve the quality of life of all American citizens.

Finally, Article 4 says that every state must have a republican form of government and guarantees that the federal government will protect individual states when threatened. This is a comforting section of the Constitution, because it guarantees that no state in the union will turn into a dictatorship. All Americans are guaranteed, both federally and at the state level, a form of government where the people select representatives who make the laws and where a constitution limits the power of government and protects the people. And when necessary, the federal government will step in to enforce this, as well as to protect the state from rioting, anarchy, or foreign invaders.