In past columns, we have discussed how the judiciary functions, its importance in our democratic republic, and how federal judges are appointed. In this column we will discuss the importance of judges being open to new ideas, even challenging ideas. Because one aspect of judging that is necessary, even if not widely discussed, is that judges must not be so committed to preconceived thoughts or ideas that they have difficulty reaching a fair and impartial decision in a case.
The very essence of representative democracy is holding free and fair elections in which the people get to make their choices through voting. No one needs a reminder that November is voting month. Our televisions are inundated with political commercials. Our mailboxes are filled with political circulars touting one political candidate or another. On our tablets, cellphones, and laptops, we see online political ads. November is undoubtedly the season for voting.
We are living in a time when we can take for granted so many things that a mere hundred years ago would have been considered miracles or the height of fantasy. We enjoy products that make life easier and more pleasant, and even products that prolong life itself. In our work we have many tools that increase our efficiency and allow us to be more productive. In our health care we receive treatment through an ever-increasing array of medications, medical procedures, and medical equipment.
Constitution Day is September 17. Congress set this day aside in 2004 for us to honor the signing of the Constitution in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on September 17, 1787. In the law establishing Constitution Day, Congress also required that all publicly funded educational institutions and federal agencies provide educational programing on the history of the Constitution on this day.
The United States is rare among the countries of the world in having a jury system. A system in which ordinary people, randomly selected from a cross-section of the community, are brought in from their homes and everyday pursuits, always at considerable inconvenience and sometimes even at a sacrifice, to participate in government decision-making. In criminal cases, juries decide whether individuals should be charged with a crime and whether those accused of crimes should be found guilty. In civil cases, juries decide whether someone is liable at law to someone else and, if so, what amount of money must be paid. In many other countries, all these decisions are made by government officials. In our country, no person can be deprived of life, liberty, or property by the government without the consent of citizens acting as jurors.
Several recent Supreme Court opinions have sparked a great debate in our nation about the role and function of the Supreme Court, and to a lesser degree federal courts in general. One aspect of this debate concerns the power of the unelected Supreme Court to overturn laws passed by the elected Congress and signed into law by the elected President. The debate extends to the power of the Court to overturn laws passed by states. Some critics argue this is undemocratic and an unelected body should not have this power. They also correctly point out that this power, called judicial review, is not mentioned in the Constitution itself. So where does it come from?
Americans often talk about “our rights” and are not hesitant to invoke “our rights.” When we do so, we are talking about those rights protected under the United States Constitution, such as the right to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. As citizens, we all have these and other rights protected from infringement by the government, whether federal or state. These rights are vitally important and play a large role in the kind of government we have and the society in which we live.
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. So if a law be in opposition to the constitution . . . the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.”
A sound knowledge of civics is essential for the functioning and continuation of our form of democracy. Many of our national leaders have expressed concern at the lack of civics knowledge by much of our population. One problem is, how do we make civics education more than just a drudgery for our younger generation? Here is one example of how civics education can be not only enlightening but also fun.
On April 14, 2022, the Eastern District of Tennessee conducted its inaugural “Civics Bowl” in the Chattanooga federal courthouse. The event was sponsored by the Chattanooga Chapter of the Federal Bar Association. The participants were members of the Chattanooga Urban League’s National Achievers Society, a group of high school students from various Chattanooga schools focusing on college and life preparation.
The students were given a list of civics questions to research and study in advance. They were divided into two teams and took turns competing to answer the questions, with whoever hit their buzzer first getting the first try at the question. The competition lasted an enthusiastic half hour. Each member of the winning team received a $15 gift card, courtesy of the FBA.
After the competition, the students heard from and asked questions of legal practitioners about what they do and how they got where they are. The panelists were Erin Rust of the Federal Defender Services, Assistant U.S. Attorney Perry Piper, Alexis Crutchfield of Miller & Martin, federal law clerk Kristen Dupard, and District Judge Curtis Collier.
