101 Politicians' or the People's Court?
edlind at dickinson.edu
Mon Sep 12 15:34:10 PDT 2005
In re-reading what I wrote in this post, I see that I misquoted the
original. It should read "democratically enacted legislation" not
"democratically elected legislation." My apologies to Prof. Freeman for
attributing the infelicitous phrasing to him.
The article actually does not develop the common argument in the
standard way. It's there for those who might be interested. And it
will doubtless be unpersuasive to those who are not persuaded (and
persuasive to those who are).
RJLipkin at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 9/12/2005 5:26:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> edlind at dickinson.edu writes:
> "By granting a non-legislative body that is not electorally
> accountable the power to review democratically elected legislation,
> citizens provide themselves with a means for protecting their
> sovereignty and independence from the unreasonable exercise of their
> political rights in legislative processes."
> This argument is, of course a common one, but it fails
> conspicuously to address how citizens can protect themselves "from the
> unreasonable exercise [or elimination--my addition] of their political
> rights" from the judicial process.
> Citizens should seek ways to check both branches of government.
> But the idea that a politically unaccountable branch is the obvious
> choice to protect citizens against legislative excess is plausible only
> if there is reason--conceptual, normative, or empirical--to believe such
> a branch will not itself violate the sovereignty of the people (citizens).
> Robert Justin Lipkin
> Professor of Law
> Widener University School of Law
Douglas E. Edlin
Department of Political Science
P.O. Box 1773
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
More information about the Conlawprof