Chief Justice Attacks a Law as Infringing on Judges

[pinkpops]

Look who woke up to smell the bacon...

WASHINGTON, Dec. 31 — Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist criticized Congress in unusually pointed terms on Wednesday for a recent law that places federal judges under special scrutiny for sentences that fall short of those called for by the federal sentencing guidelines.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/01/politics/01SCOT.html?hp

Next thing you know the congress will force him to take those gold stripes off his sleeves.

[Eric J in MN]

1. Rehnquist is right about this. Ashcroft is wrong to intimidate judges nt

nt

[indepat]

20. Right you are: however, should not the American people infringe on judges

and congressmen who infringe upon the Constitution of the United States.

[impeach the gop]

2. Gee, never thought this one had it in him.

n/t

[pinkpops]

4. Maybe he'll be careful

who he appoints to be President next time.

[DulceDecorum]

12. Mmmm, they'll be no next time.

The laws are being re-written right now.
http://www.ukar.org/gore10.html

[jsw_81]

3. Republicans are trying this with church/state issues too

They want a law that restricts courts from even hearing church/state issues so that their rabid, fundamentalist Christian base will be able to harass non-Christians at will.

[madrchsod]

6. it`s not just non- christians

it`s the mainstream christians they`re after also.

[salin]

13. This is a big point that many people just don't seem to get.

Those pushing theocracy have a singular vision of Christianity - and most Christians in this country do not follow that vision - and thus are targeted as well.

[madrchsod]

5. wow the chief

justice standing up for the Constitution-what next? the house and senate doing there`s? well one step at a time

[kainah]

7. the courts are starting to remember

that they are a co-equal branch of government. Rehnquist loves his privileges and he doesn't want anyone messing with their sanctity.

[Doctor Panacea]

8. Stopped clock

It is, indeed, a strange feeling to realize that you are agreeing with Rehnquist. But even a stopped clock is still correct twice a day.

[goforit]

9. Yes, between the Patriot Act and this, Congress appears to be unfit

for the job.
They just don't seem to care to review what is at stake.

Congress is in their saddest period in the history of the United States.

We need to elect a clean slate for 2004.

[bain_sidhe]

10. Renquist lets them stomp all over the constitution

but squawks when they stop on HIS toes!

Jerk.

**edit due to my hair-trigger apostrophe finger**

[0007]

19. Oh, how right that statement sounds.

The goose & the gander are both making noises.

[Jacobin]

11. He's just miffed that he stole the White House for the neo-cons

and now they are treading on his turf.

[Moderator]

14. Kick

:dem:

[Feanorcurufinwe]

15. Extension of the mandatory minimum trend restricting judicial discretion

that started back in the 80s. Actually it was a Senate speech against mandatory minumums back in the early 90s when John Kerry first really got my attention impressed me.

[Judi Lynn]

16. More on this subject

Rehnquist scolds Congress over reducing judges' discretion in sentencing

JENNIFER C. KERR, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, December 31, 2003



(12-31) 22:49 PST WASHINGTON (AP) --

Congress should have sought the judiciary's advice before limiting the ability of judges to impose lighter sentences than specified in federal guidelines, the nation's top judge says.

"During the last year, it seems that the traditional interchange between the Congress and the Judiciary broke down when Congress enacted what is known as the Protect Act, making some rather dramatic changes to the laws governing the federal sentencing process," Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote Thursday in his annual report on the state of the judiciary.

The changes that Rehnquist objects to were tucked into an anti-crime bill passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush in April. It targeted child kidnappers, molesters and pornographers and included a national Amber Alert network.

But it also included a provision sponsored by Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla., and supported by Attorney General John Ashcroft, that reduced federal judges' discretion in sentencing criminals, and required reports to Congress on any judge who departs from sentencing guidelines.
(snip/...)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/12/31/national0149EST0426.DTL

[Melinda]

17. Well, well, well.

What to make of this...

Seems to me he just issued an opinion off the bench. Litigate this up to SCOTUS and he really has to recuse himself just as Scalia did in the Pledge case...

He's trying to influence policy too. It irks me when federal judges politik; he's up to something, and I don't trust him.

[moondust]

18. I thought Asscroft was the central scrutinizer.

He was demanding the same damn thing a while back. I don't recall hearing any whining then.

[Moderator]

21. Kick

:dem: