Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional Website.
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
2009 Ron Paul 9:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce
the We the People Act. The We the People
Act forbids federal courts, including the
Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning
State laws and polices relating to religious
liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving
sexual practices, sexual orientation or
reproduction. The We the People Act also protects
the traditional definition of marriage from
judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme
Court cannot abuse the equal protection
clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold
Federal judges accountable for abusing their
powers, the act also provides that a judge who
violates the act’s limitations on judicial power
shall either be impeached by Congress or removed
by the President, according to rules established
by the Congress.
2009 Ron Paul 9:2
The United States Constitution gives Congress
the authority to establish and limit the
jurisdiction of the lower Federal courts and
limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The
Founders intended Congress to use this authority
to correct abuses of power by the Federal
judiciary.
2009 Ron Paul 9:3
Some may claim that an activist judiciary
that strikes down State laws at will expands
individual liberty. Proponents of this claim
overlook the fact that the best guarantor of
true liberty is decentralized political institutions,
while the greatest threat to liberty is
concentrated power. This is why the Constitution
carefully limits the power of the Federal
Government over the States.
2009 Ron Paul 9:4
In recent years, we have seen numerous
abuses of power by Federal courts. Federal
judges regularly strike down State and local
laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual
orientation, family relations, education, and
abortion. This government by Federal judiciary
causes a virtual nullification of the Tenth
Amendment’s limitations on Federal power.
Furthermore, when Federal judges impose
their preferred polices on State and local governments,
instead of respecting the polices
adopted by those elected by, and thus accountable
to, the people, republican government
is threatened. Article IV, section 4 of the
United States Constitution guarantees each
State a republican form of government. Thus,
Congress must act when the executive or judicial
branch threatens the republican governments
of the individual States. Therefore, Congress
has a responsibility to stop Federal
judges from running roughshod over State and
local laws. The Founders would certainly have
supported congressional action to reign in
Federal judges who tell citizens where they
can and can’t place manger scenes at Christmas.
2009 Ron Paul 9:5
Madam Speaker, even some supporters of
liberalized abortion laws have admitted that
the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision,
which overturned the abortion laws of all 50
States, is flawed. The Supreme Court’s establishment
clause jurisdiction has also drawn
criticism from across the political spectrum.
Perhaps more importantly, attempts to resolve,
by judicial fiat, important issues like abortion
and the expression of religious belief in the
public square increase social strife and conflict.
The only way to resolve controversial social
issues like abortion and school prayer is
to restore respect for the right of State and
local governments to adopt polices that reflect
the beliefs of the citizens of those jurisdictions.
I would remind my colleagues and the Federal
judiciary that, under our constitutional system,
there is no reason why the people of New
York and the people of Texas should have the
same policies regarding issues such as marriage
and school prayer.
2009 Ron Paul 9:6
Unless Congress acts, a State’s authority to
define and regulate marriage may be the next
victim of activist judges. After all, such a decision
would simply take the Supreme Court’s
decision in the Lawrence case, which overturned
all State sodomy laws, to its logical
conclusion. Congress must launch a preemptive
strike against any further Federal usurpation
of the States’ authority to regulate marriage
by removing issues concerning the definition
of marriage from the jurisdiction of Federal
courts.
2009 Ron Paul 9:7
Although marriage is licensed and otherwise
regulated by the States, government did not
create the institution of marriage. Government
regulation of marriage is based on State recognition
of the practices and customs formulated
by private individuals interacting in civil
institutions, such as churches and synagogues.
Having Federal officials, whether
judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose
a new definition of marriage on the people is
an act of social engineering profoundly hostile
to liberty.
2009 Ron Paul 9:8
It is long past time that Congress exercises
its authority to protect the republican government
of the States from out-of-control Federal
judges. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor
the We the People Act.
