February 10, 2026
How to Reform the Courts?
Timothy Birdnow
People do not understand the Constitution and separation of powers.
Most people think the courts cannot be disciplined by Congress because the Constitution says the courts are a coequal branch of government. But that isn't really true; the Supreme Court is a coequal branch of government and cannot be tampered with, but all inferior courts are created BY CONGRESS. Article III of the Constitution states:
Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
You will note that while judges have tenure for good behavior the Congress can indeed limit the scope of their authority.
While they have lifetime tenure, their offices do not and Congress can abolish any court it pleases, or it would not have been empowered to create them in the first place. You will note the Supreme Court was not given the power to create courts. And if Congress can't abolish a court then it can defund it. They have to pay the judge's salary but they don't have to give him any cases; cut funding for that district court to just the judge's salary and you have essentially removed him from office.
You can also give him an office in a tent, or a broom closet; that would go a long way towards reining these jerks in.
The Federalist article explains how judges may not be disciplined nor impeached for POLICY issues based on a Congressional act:
Of course the Democrats would filibuster any attempt to change THAT statute so it would still require sixty votes to pass. Any judicial reform will require that. And of course any change in statute will face challenge - in court. Judges are all going to be unwilling to rule in favor of limiting their own power.The law that creates the process for disciplining federal judges explicitly states that any complaint against a judge "directly related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling” is to be dismissed. Thus, judges, in essence, have immunity for anything they put into a decision or order. This statute was specifically referenced in a pair of decisions declining to investigate disciplinary complaints against Judge Boasberg, for example.
This is quite the protection for an individual with a lifetime appointment and who was never democratically elected. In theory (or practice?), a judge could look at the Constitution itself and decide he or she does not like the plain meaning of an article or amendment, and issue a ruling that would hold otherwise.
So reform is very unlikely. We will have to find new and creative ways to punish these clowns. It can be done but it takes some outside the box thinking.
The really sad thing is the Supreme Court can't even discipline the inferior courts, and they have to keep making the same rulings over and over as the lower judges just ignore them. Ignoring a Supreme Court ruling should be an automatic dismissal, but the Founders didn't think of that. I suppose they figured giving SCOTUS the power to remove inferior judges gave them too much power, but they didn't understand how politicized the court system would become.
And they didn't understand how pucillanimous Congress would be. The Demo-Left uses the courts to simply negate the will of the people and at the same time avoid the consequences of their actions.
The courts are out of control and need to be reminded that they work for the People and not for one political party. We need new and better ideas for reining them in. Frankly, we need a Constitutional Amendment that would allow for the removal of judges. I like a retention vote periodically, as is done with judges in state courts. And maybe allow for a recall petition.
But that would of course require an amendment. Now we are limited in our ability to influence the black robes. But it won't be so forever. Mostly it comes down to finding people to serve in Congress who have a pair of danglies. Too bad so few in the GOP meet that definition.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
01:12 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 901 words, total size 6 kb.
26kb generated in CPU 0.0715, elapsed 0.2885 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.2704 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.2704 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
