DeLay endorses “court stripping”

Sometimes, it’s a little too easy to criticize Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) for being, how do I put this gently, a lunatic. Cataloging all of his bizarre theories, hateful rhetoric, and dangerous ideas could easily be a full-time job, so I usually just brush off his outbursts and hope that someone else is keeping track of him in case there’s ever a court hearing to determine his sanity. The other day, however, DeLay struck a nerve.

In yesterday’s Washington Times, an unabashedly right-wing daily newspaper in DC, an article detailed the latest remarks from DeLay on an issue near and dear to his heart — the federal judiciary.

DeLay said if the Supreme Court fails to overturn the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling on the constitutionality of religious language in the Pledge of Allegiance, he would consider removing federal courts’ jurisdiction on such matters.

“Congress, for so long, has been lax in standing up for the Constitution,” the former bug spray salesman said. “There are ways to express ourselves — for instance, we could limit the jurisdiction of the judicial branch.”

Putting aside the merits of the Pledge case, and why the ruling was correct, DeLay’s remarks represent a shocking assault on the judicial branch, the principle of separation of powers, and common sense.

The tactic DeLay appears to be considering is something called “court stripping.” The idea behind it is simple: when Congress decides it doesn’t like the way the judicial branch is ruling on cases, lawmakers feel it is within their power to away the courts’ power. You may have learned in junior high civics class about “separation of powers,” a principle that gives the legislative branch the authority to write the laws, the executive branch the power to execute the laws, and the judicial branch the power to interpret the laws. Under the court stripping approach favored by DeLay, Congress would shuffle those responsibilities a bit, giving the legislative branch increased judicial power over courts.

This may sound like governing trivia, but for legal and poli sci types, this is on the furthest fringes of political thought in America. There’s nothing “conservative” about it. The very idea that Congress would interfere with courts’ jurisdiction turns the idea of an “independent” judiciary on its head, but nuts like DeLay think it’s a good idea.

Unfortunately, too many congressional Republicans seem to agree. In the Times article, Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Constitution subcommittee, suggested that a “statutory change to limit jurisdiction” might be a good idea.

They’re not the only ones. On multiple occasions in the 1980s, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) tried repeatedly to remove the ability of the federal courts to hear school prayer cases. Fortunately, his efforts were always defeated.

Congress’ biggest fan of court stripping has got to be Rep. Bob Aderholt (R-Ala.). On three occasions, Aderholt has introduced legislation to remove the federal courts’ jurisdiction on cases challenging government-sponsored Ten Commandments displays. So far, the legislation hasn’t gone anywhere, but Aderholt keeps trying.

Fortunately, I had the chance to hear Aderholt’s court-stripping “philosophy,” articulated by the congressman himself, on television a couple of years ago.

On the July 27, 2001 episode of TV preacher Pat Robertson’s “700 Club” program, Aderholt argued that the Supreme Court should not always be the final arbiter of the Constitution. He asserted, “[O]ver several decades, there has been a view that the United States Supreme Court has the final authority [on interpreting the Constitution]…. And it would be our argument, we would make the argument, the Supreme Court does not always have the final authority over the interpretation of the Constitution.”

This is complete nonsense. It’s outrageous for DeLay, the House majority leader, to buy into this claptrap. It probably won’t matter because the Supreme Court is likely to reverse the appeals court’s ruling on the Pledge, but that’s not the point. The fact that “leaders” such as DeLay would consider court stripping as a legitimate use of Congress’ authority should frighten anyone who takes an independent judiciary seriously.