Attacks on Judges: Why They Fail

• NCJ Number: 172240
• Journal: Judicature Volume: 81 Issue: 4 Dated: (January-February 1998) Pages: 150-155
• Author(s): B Friedman
• Date Published: 1998
• Length: 6 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Survey
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Article adapted from testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Federalism, and Property Rights, July 14, 1997

Annotation

Judges are sometimes attacked because the public perceives they are interfering with the proper workings of democracy and believes the judiciary should be independent.

Abstract

Attacks on judges are invariably political but not necessarily partisan, and challenges to judicial independence have come from both liberals and conservatives. Complaints about judges seem to primarily involve individual judicial decisions. Many approaches to control the Federal judiciary have been proposed throughout U.S. history, and attempting to strip the courts of jurisdiction has also been popular. History suggests that almost every attempt to interfere with judicial independence has failed and that citizens believe "ordinary processes" for controlling judges and the judiciary should prevail. These processes include the appellate process and the Federal judge appointment and confirmation process.