Republic Rules - The U.S.A. is a great representative republic.

This past week, the Supreme Court affirmed our right to bear arms.  Barely.  It was a 5-4 decision.  That is how close we came to losing the Second Amendment:

 A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There has been considerable debate as to the Founders’ meaning regarding “Militia”.  Does that mean only the armed forces and police should have the right to bear arms?  A very sobering thought, if so.  It seems such an important decision regarding an integral part of our Constitution should err on the side of the individual… on the side of NOT TAKING RIGHTS AWAY if there’s any doubt whatsoever.  Happily, that was the case.

But only by ONE VOTE.

A single Justice voting the opposite way would have sent a chill down the backs of any informed, caring American.

Which makes me think about how the effect of the Supreme Court has changed over the past few decades.  Rather than being a part of the balance of power with the Executive and Legislative branches of our government, interpreting laws and actions for their Constitutionality… this body has taken upon themselves the ability to not just interpret but MANIPULATE the meaning of laws… and, in all practicality, can change the true EFFECT of law.  Many call this “legislating from the bench”… a practice I despise.

While I understand the original reasoning behind the lifetime appointments Supreme Court justices enjoy, it seems they have taken that “immunity” for granted.  All too often, their decisions are based less on determining the letter of the law than distorting it to conform with their political beliefs.

So, if members of the Supreme Court are becoming active political animals, then they should be treated as politicians in other branches of government… and come under the ultimate control of the people through our right to vote.  I’m not suggesting judges be elected as often as our regular representatives… but maybe their right to CONTINUE to sit on the bench should be subject to some kind of renewal or affirmation process.  While it should not be easy to remove a sitting Justice, I’ve come to believe it should be possible… perhaps some high percentage of the vote.  While it would take some very extreme abuse to motivate enough people to vote in favor of dismissal, the fact that it was a possibilitycould have a leveling effect on their decisions.