Get the Federal Courts Back in Line!
Recently introduced bill would require federal courts to operate within authorized limits
By Marilyn M. Brannan, Assoc. Editor
Unravelling The New World Order

Phyllis Schlafly reports that a move is now underway to require the federal courts to operate within their authorized jurisdiction (“Restoring Constitutional Separation of Powers,” Feb. 25, 2004, www.eagleforum.org).

Recently introduced legislation would clarify that the federal courts do not have jurisdiction to hear cases brought against a federal, state or local government or officer for acknowledging God. This is exactly what Judge Roy Moore of Alabama maintained in refusing to remove a granite monument displaying the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of Alabama’s Supreme Court building. As Justice Moore correctly asserted, courts can only articulate what already is law; they may not make law. Judge Moore’s insistence that the Ten Commandments monument was lawful under Alabama law is supported by words in the Preamble to the Alabama Constitution which state, “We the people of the State of Alabama, invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution . . .”

Federal Judge Myron Thompson found Justice Moore in violation of the “doctrine of Separation of Church and State.” The only problem with such a finding is that there is no such language anywhere in the Constitution.

The bill, entitled the “Constitution Restoration Act,” is a response to dozens of cases filed across the nation, asking federal judges to declare unconstitutional the recitation in public schools of the Pledge of Allegiance with the words “under God” included, and asking that the display of the Ten Commandments in other public buildings or parks be held unconstitutional.

These lawsuits are initiated under the pretext that “under God” in the Pledge and the display of the Ten Commandments violate the First Amendment, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” In fact, the acknowledgment of God in the Pledge and the display of the Ten Commandments do not constitute an “establishment of religion.”

The sponsors of the new bill believe that federal courts do not have the authority to hear such cases or render such decisions. There is no law that bans the acknowledgement of God, and the U.S. Constitution delegates all legislative power to Congress—and none to the courts. These critically important facts are being recklessly disregarded, and un-elected judges—against the wishes of Congress, state legislatures, and the American people—are assaulting our faith and our national respect for God. Lawsuits may soon target other acknowledgments of God such as our national motto, “In God We Trust,” and our national anthem, which contains the words, “In God is our trust.”

All three branches of our federal government and our military have throughout our history acknowledged God. Congress opens each session with a prayer, and the President ends his speeches with “God bless America.” All public officials swear to uphold the constitution by a solemn oath ending with the words, “so help me God.” Our Declaration of Independence acknowledges God as our creator, supreme lawgiver, supreme judge and protector. Every single one of the constitutions of our 50 states includes an acknowledgement of God.

Nevertheless, a handful of activist judges have, in the last couple of years, presumed to ban the acknowledgment of God from documents, monuments, songs, expressions and practices that have been a part of our culture from its beginnings. The federal courts have unlawfully asserted judicial supremacy over the other branches of government, one decision at a time; and Congress and the American people have been letting them get by with this unconstitutional power grab.

James Madison, often referred to as “the Father of the United States Constitution,” believed that the preservation of liberty depends on the separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government. Acting in their proper roles under the Constitution, the branches of government are designed to limit the power of the other branches and to keep the others in their proper places.

The Constitution Restoration Act affirms the separation of powers by re-asserting the rule, properly observed by federal courts for two centuries, that they have no jurisdiction to consider cases involving the acknowledgment of God.

It is time for Congress to step up to the plate and mandate that federal courts may not censor public acknowledgments of God, adding this to other “exceptions” and “regulations” to federal court jurisdiction.

Alexander Hamilton exhorted the Founders to keep the judiciary branch as the “least powerful” branch and to see to it that “judges should be bound down by strict rules and precedents, which serve to define and point out their duty.”

Additionally, the Constitution Restoration Act orders federal courts not to rely on foreign laws, administrative rules or court decisions. Americans have been shocked to learn that five U.S. Supreme Court justices have inappropriately, and with an alarming disregard for the U.S. Constitution and U.S. laws, cited foreign sources in their decisions.

At this writing, we are advised that both the Senate bill and the House bill have been referred to their respective judiciary committees.

We urge our readers to contact your representatives in Congress and let them know that you support congressional action to rein in the activist judges that are thumbing their noses at Congress, the state legislatures, and the American people in order to impose their radical agendas.