Democracy in America is one of the most acclaimed in the world. Democracy involves elected representatives carrying out the wishes of the people, by establishing laws that uphold such wishes. History has shown that for a democracy to be equitable, there has to be checks and balances. The reason why the founding fathers, in their wisdom deemed it necessary to divide government into three tiers, the administration, the legislature, and the judiciary. In a country like America, where the relationships between these governmental arms are established the overall quality of governance is much better.
Sadly enough, Charles Neily of Fox News in his opinion page of October 10 titled, "Wanted -- less judicial activism, more judicial engagement," sees things differently by suggesting that America has an “activist” judiciary that constantly involves itself in policy disputes best left to the other branches?
A system that has its members so politically polarized such as is tenable in Washington, D.C. as in recent history, where nothing seems to work and no laws are being passed, needs somebody somewhere to act in the interest of the people. Why not the judiciary?
Andrew Jackson, as president, in 1816 vetoed a bill congress approved to extend for another twenty-year, a chatter for the Second Bank of the United States. He insisted that the proper role for government was to offer "equal protection to all citizens." To defend them against entrenched economic interest.
Healthcare is one of the most lucrative businesses in America today. Little wonder the powers that control this sector of the economy would stop at nothing to keep it within their powers. It is an avenue through which they milk the masses dry. These Bourgeoisie which Clark Neily obviously pundits for see everything wrong with the affordable healthcare being implemented by the federal government. And would use anything within their powers to archive their goals, including shutting down the government as just witnessed; sadly enough.
Clark Neily in his argument that America is not a democracy, wrongly justifies it by quoting Justice Ginsburg when she says in an interview that, “if it’s measured in terms of readiness to overturn legislation, this is one of the most activist courts in history.” Of course it is. It has to be. That is the only way the courts can protect the populace from policy makers who are in the pockets of "special interests" that are bent on having things their way or no other way.
