AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.

Protecting our freedom of religion: Congress has a golden opportunity to prevent the Supreme Court and all other federal courts from ruling on acknowledgement-of-God issues.(CONSTITUTION CORNER)

The New American

| February 06, 2006 | Detweiler, George | COPYRIGHT 2006 American Opinion Publishing, Inc. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan.  All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information)Copyright

Recent judicial atrocities have awakened Congress to its long-neglected ability to limit the appellate jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court by using powers granted in Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution. In Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court granted practitioners of sodomy protection for their behaviors. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argued the case in favor of Lawrence's position that sodomy has constitutional protection. The court cited decisions of foreign courts in determining that the Constitution protects sodomy. The Founding Fathers would have been astounded and revolted by the decision.

Later, a federal court ordered Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the rotunda of the building housing the Alabama Supreme Court chambers. The monument was removed from the rotunda--and Judge Moore was subsequently removed from office.

These miscarriages of justice would have been prevented by a bill now pending before both houses of Congress. The bill, known as the Constitution Restoration Act, has eight cosponsors in the Senate (where the bill number is S. 520) and 40 in the House (H.R. 1070).

Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution gives Congress power to provide "exceptions to and regulation of" the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Moreover, since all other federal courts are created by acts of Congress, their jurisdictions are subject to congressional control. S. 520 and H.R. 1070 deny to the Supreme Court jurisdiction to hear appeals involving the "acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty or government," by any level of government or by any agent thereof.

The First Amendment to the Constitution has two provisions regarding religious liberty. It prohibits Congress from establishing any denomination as an official national religion. It also guarantees the personal, individual liberty of the free exercise of religion. Through a series of court decisions, these provisions have morphed into a prohibition of the mention of God or anything that "endorses" religion by any official in any level of government. It is a blatant distortion of the First Amendment. Again, the ACLU was behind these decisions. That organization was founded in 1920 by Roger Baldwin and others. Baldwin was an avowed socialist, whose stated goal was to destroy Christianity and capitalism. Other organizations in league with the ACLU in these efforts are People for the American Way and the National Education Association.

S. 520 and H.R. 1070 also provide that "in interpreting the Constitution ..., a [federal] court may not rely upon" foreign law. The process of interpreting the Constitution involves applying the words of that document to a set of facts in the case before a court. It also involves examining and generally following earlier decisions which had the same constitutional provisions and fact patterns similar to those in the case before the court. Foreign law has no place in the process. The laws and court decisions of other countries are peculiar to their legal systems and their cultures. Reliance upon foreign law to interpret the Constitution is a practice fraught with pitfalls and opportunities for distortions and mistakes. It has no place in constitutional jurisprudence. S. 520 and H.R. 1070 also limit the jurisdictions of lower federal courts, as well as the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Although events ...

Related articles from newspapers, magazines, journals, and more
Court's door open for more voucher cases; The Supreme Court says federal courts...
Newspaper article from: The Christian Science Monitor June 18, 2004 700+ words
...WASHINGTON -- The US Supreme Court has set the...was whether federal courts have jurisdiction...vindicated in federal courts. That is the...fight to the federal courts, hoping to...appealing to the US Supreme Court, Arizona officials...
High court holding on shipyard could threaten Navy procurements. (Supreme Court...
Newspaper article from: Defense Daily March 3, 1994 700+ words
...shedding excess infrastructure could fall by the wayside if a case argued yesterday before the Supreme Court yields a verdict that U.S. federal courts can review decisions made by the Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC). Both Navy...
Insurers ask High Court to save fed court access.(insurance industry lawyers...
Magazine article from: National Underwriter Property & Casualty-Risk & Benefits Management Brostoff, Steven February 26, 1996 700+ words
...the U.S. Supreme Court to preserve their access to federal courts in insurance...petitioned the Supreme Court to review the...these claims in federal courts. Federal jurisdiction...allowing access to federal courts in this situation...
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore is contending that federal courts...
Magazine article from: The Christian Century January 11, 2003 700+ words
* Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore is contending that federal courts have no jurisdiction over his decision to erect a 5,800-pound granite monument to the Protestant translation of the Ten Commandments...
ACLJ: Supreme Court to Decide Who Will Run War on Terrorism - Federal Courts or...
Press release article from: Business Wire April 20, 2004 700+ words
...oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court were "troubling" and opened...involving the war on terrorism to the federal courts." "It is troubling that a number...added: "It is our hope that the Supreme Court follows its own precedent and...
U.S. Supreme Court holds that, as in 1789, federal courts today lack equitable...
Newspaper article from: International Law Update July 1, 1999 700+ words
Alliance Bond Fund, Inc. and other investment funds (AMD) bought $75,000,000 worth of unsecured notes (Notes) from Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo, S.A. (GMD), a Mexican holding company. Four GMD subsidiaries guaranteed the Notes.
Supreme Court upholds EPA's process for setting air standards. (Federal...
Newspaper article from: California Planning & Development Report April 1, 2001 700+ words
...federal regulatory agencies, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Environmental Protection...setting standards. But a unanimous Supreme Court disagreed, with conservative Justice...Journal D.A.R. 1981. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review an adult business...
Federal Courts Split Over Application Of Supreme Court's Wetlands...
News wire article from: Mondaq Business Briefing December 4, 2007 700+ words
...inconsistent with the definition articulated by the United States Supreme Court. In United States v. McWane, 2007 WL 3087419, *12...environmental advocates, were all anxious to see how the Supreme Court would resolve challenges to the Army Corps of Engineers...
For more facts and information, see all results
©2009 Gale, a part of Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
About us | FAQs | Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms and conditions
Other Gale sites: Encyclopedia.com | HighBeam Research | Acquire Content | Books & Authors | Goliath | MovieRetriever | Smart QandA