arrogant justices?

seriously, WTF
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/14/justice.sunday.ap/index.html

from the trap of James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family
"These activist, unelected judges believe they know better than the American people about the direction the country should go. The framers of our great nation did not intend for the courts to have absolute and final power over us."

first of all, your dearest president, has the power to select new judges, with the "advice and consent" of congress. i would call that much more "absolute and final power" if we were as dense as dobson and didn't think about the fact that normally, judges will retire over a staggered period of years and under various presidents. therefore allowing for different presidents of differing ideologies to select their own judges, allowing for a balanced quorum. the "framers of our great nation" began this and we have only continued it without change.

the courts do not have absolute power. "final" is a more relative term that can be semantically reinterpreted; arguing about that word is moot. the courts cannot introduce a new law, they only decide on whether a law is constitutional. new laws and procedures are introduced by congress. yes the courts can block a law that they deem unconstitutional. the president can just as well veto a bill if he doesn't agree with it. vetoing actually allows for a lot more subjectivity on the president's part.

Bill Donahue, (Catholic League prez) would like to add: "unless a judicial vote is unanimous, you cannot overturn a law created by Congress." so in addition to changing age-old senate rules, they want to change judicial rules as well. however, i found here (http://www.pregnantpause.org/court/uncon.htm) that judicial regulation was actually heavily debated by the founders. the supreme court's jurisdiction is precluded by regulations made by congress. but it was never indicated how many congressional votes would be needed, and under what circumstances regulations could be made. and we move into progressively more politicized times so any regulations congress imposes on the courts now will smack of party pressures. what to do.

this is an interesting article studying the supreme court's historical presence, rulings and power: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/supreme_court.htm