The audio version of the CourtZero book is now free to all.

Multimedia:  Click here for fun and free downloads, including the CourtZero book, radio interviews, and more.

The People Confront the Courts

The Kelo case made property rights illusory. The Campaign Finance Reform case gave the power to regulate political speech to the powerful. These are just two examples of the malfunctioning of the courts. Recent Supreme Court rulings make it clear that our Constitution, as we knew it, no longer exists.  A constitutional crisis is on the horizon, and there is little evidence to suggest that the other two branches of our government will do much about it.  Our elected representatives no longer pass laws; they simply suggest laws for the approval or disapproval of any federal judge who might want the law to say something different.  CourtZero wants to educate fellow citizens as well as remind our representatives that we are serious about preserving representative government.

Are you confident in our courts?

CourtZero is about much more than fighting judicial activism.

This is about much more than any particular social issue.

This is all about the preservation of representative government.

Judicial activism versus independence of the judiciary

This site is dedicated to education and discussion about judicial activism.  Courts certainly have necessary functions, such as reviewing the decisions of other judges, resolving legitimate disputes, and keeping the criminal justice system running.  Deciding social and moral policy for a nation, however, is another thing entirely.

There are essentially two points of view of the courts in America:  one side sees activist judges as a growing threat, a group of high priests who exercise the power of kings and cannot be effectively challenged.  The other side claims that judges must be free to make their rulings outside of the influence of societal and political pressure, otherwise society will lose confidence in the court system.  What’s often lost in the debate is the fact that That’s a great notion, but…

          What is your level of confidence and trust in the courts today anyway?  Zero?

The Constitution should only be changed by the will of the people

What does it take for the people, the governed, to amend the United States Constitution?

  First, the people must convince their elected representatives to consider an amendment.  The members of Congress must draft an amendment.  The two Houses of Congress must agree on one version.  Two-thirds of all Representatives and separately two-thirds of all Senators must vote for the amendment.  Each State must then decide to vote on the amendment, and three-fourths of all the States must vote for the amendment.

  What does it take for a judge to amend the United States Constitution?

  He says so.

Can we change the rules?

Our system of government relies on the checks and balances between three equal branches.

How do the other two branches of government, the executive and the legislative, apply “checks and balances” on the judicial branch (the courts)?

  Judges can be impeached, the budgets of courts can be decreased, and legislatures can properly and constitutionally modify the scope of the courts’ jurisdictions.  In modern history, the other two branches simply do not have the will to exercise these controls.

  How does the judicial branch – the courts – apply checks and balances on the other two branches, not to mention the will of the people?

  It says so.

What can the people do?

e-mail to postmaster-at-courtzero.org