Rehnquist Sees Threat to Judiciary

The LA Times reports that ailing Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, a conservative member of the court appointed by President Nixon, lashed out at conservative attacks on the judiciary, stating "judges must be protected from political threats, including from conservative Republicans who maintain that 'judicial activists' should be impeached and removed from office."

He continued: "The Constitution protects judicial independence not to benefit judges, but to promote the rule of law: Judges are expected to administer the law fairly, without regard to public reaction... A judge's judicial acts may not serve as a basis for impeachment. Any other rule would destroy judicial independence. Instead of trying to apply the law fairly, regardless of public opinion, judges would be concerned about inflaming any group that might be able to muster the votes in Congress to impeach and convict them... The appellate process provides a 'remedy' for those who believe a judge has erred."

Now it can hardly be argued that Rehnquist is defending liberal judges, but it's obvious even to someone like him how assinine the idea of punishing judges simply for their decisions is. The Framers of the Constitution intended only two checks on judicial decisions: appointment and appeal, not impeachment. This kind of action would destroy the independence of the judiciary, and put the judicial branch under the foot of the executive and legislative ones, stripping away the balance of power between them. But conservatives know that - it's exactly what they want to happen. They want to monopolize their power in government. Now I don't see how anyone except those in power (and those who put them there) can see that as a good thing, whether you are conservative or not. It's certainly not the kind of thing that the Framers ever intended for America.