We’re sharing the content of a Facebook post by Republican Representative and former judge Steven Becker.
HUH?
Apparently our Governor had a difficult week in the wake of a few court rulings. He was upset to the point of issuing a public statement Friday evening in his continual assault on the Judiciary. This latest offensive targeted state district court judges serving on the front lines and SCOTUS. His statement reveals his complete misunderstanding of the role of the Judiciary.
The Governor is like some parents I know who blame the referees and umpires when their child loses the game. Hopefully, most of us teach our children respect of the rules and the authority of those calling the game. It’s unfortunate the Governor attacks judges to deflect from his failure to grasp the basics of the game and it’s rules.
Certain statements in the Governor’s release leap out and grab the reader’s attention:
* Of the district court judge the Governor stated “he went against the will of a majority of Kansans and their elected representatives…No single judge should be allowed to change the will of the people.”
The will of the people is not a consideration in judicial decision-making. How is the will of the people changed by a district judge’s ruling?
* A three judge panel at the district court level “has replaced the judgment of Kansas voters with the judgment of unelected activist judges.”
* Referring to SCOTUS the Governor states “Activists courts should not overrule the people of this state…”
Does this apply to Brown v. Topeka Bd. of Ed?
* The Governor closes with “The rule of law should always take priority over the personal political preferences of judges.”
I strongly believe the rule of law also should always take priority over the political preferences of the majority. To believe otherwise means no one is protected from the rule of the majority.
Following the Governor’s faulty reasoning, in his world, no law could ever be found unconstitutional; the legislature and Governor could never be wrong.
The Governor argues that his statements are in support for a change in the judges’ selection method. I am thankful that THE RULE OF LAW DOES NOT EQUALTHE WILL OF THE PEOPLE (at least, not yet).