Schlafly Says Judges Are Still the Problem

“Liberals in this country know that they don’t have the hearts of the American people…so their game plan is to take their issues to the courts,” said Eagle Forum President Phyllis Schlafly last Thursday afternoon.

Members of the House Judiciary Committee have informed the leading pro-family activist that they simply do not hear from the grassroots. Schlafly aims to change that.

Conservative leaders from several top notch grassroots organizations in Washington DC gathered yesterday at the Family Research Council to participate in a discussion regarding the problem of judges and what they can do about it.

The Ninth Circuit will soon hand down decisions on whether or not the Pledge of Allegience inclusion of the words, “In God We Trust” is a violation of the First Amendment.  Schafly said if the courts take away the right of children to say the Pledge, we should “throw a national public tantrum.”

She said she will be on the steps of Capitol if that happens.

But it’s not just the federal courts that tarnish American values. In fact, according the Schlafly, lower courts — especially family courts — have the most power because they are “seldom if ever appealed.”

Courts swipe power from the people underhandedly. For example, “Judges didn’t write pornography,” said Schlafly, “but they dismantled all our defenses against it.”

They key to taking power back is called “jurisdiction stripping.” According to Andy Schlafly, Mrs. Schlafly’s son and a Harvard Law School graduate, federal jurisdiction stripping would have sped up the federal illegality of partial birth abortions instead of having it “tied up in the courts for four years.” The US Constitution enables the Congress to deny the courts jurisdiction of some cases, and these may fall within that authority.

By using “pre-enforcement challenges”, a stalling tactic used for speculation and argument before a law is enforced, liberals kept partial birth abortion laws in limbo. Somehow, a minority ends up trumping the majority with these kinds of legal maneuvers.

Though the “public is overwhelmingly against taxpayer funded abortions,” said Andy, “[most are] ordered by the state court judges.”

The pro-life issue is one among many that are created and governed by the judiciary system. Immigration, religion, pornography, marriage and parent involvement in public education all rely on the decisions of the courts.

In education, for example, courts generally partner with schools — ultimately excluding parents. They implement diversity, gay and Muslim education programs without parental knowledge or consultations in most cases.  Mrs. Schlafly she said citizens must use the tools at hand to conquer judicial activism.

“People don’t know the power Congress has to shape up the mischief of the courts,” said Mrs. Schlafly, noting that education is key.

Times have changed but the power of the judges has not. One of the most dangerous possibilities if a Democrat wins the election would be the appointment of more liberal Supreme Court Justices.

Schlafly pointed to Harriet Miers, the failed Bush Supreme Court nominee, as an example of power conservatives can wield if they really believe in something.

“We need to clip the wings of the courts. They are not recreating our culture,” she said.

Both Schlafly’s agreed that conservatives tend to believe the Supreme Court is currently sufficient because of conservative justices such as Roberts and Alito. However, Andy Schlafly said the odds against getting another conservative on the bench in the near future are “substantial.”