[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 13]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 18151]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




INTRODUCING A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE 
                      COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. FORTNEY PETE STARK

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 13, 2006

  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce a Concurrent 
Resolution recognizing the independence of the courts of the United 
States, which I authored in response to recent ``court-stripping'' 
bills such as the Pledge Protection Act and the Marriage Protection Act 
of 2004. These bills threaten the foundation of American government by 
stifling productive discussion of social issues and undermining our 
system of checks and balances.
  As explained in the resolution, the function of the Judiciary is to 
review the constitutionality of laws. It is thus undemocratic and 
blatantly partisan to use a procedural trick to protect certain 
legislation from being questioned in court. Not only does this 
indirectly violate the Constitution by devaluing the Judicial Branch, 
it also renders the entire document meaningless since constitutionality 
is no longer a standard by which all laws must be judged.
  Moreover, as courts become functionally irrelevant when faced with 
certain Acts of Congress, minorities have no recourse and cannot 
challenge oppressive laws. The view endorsed by ``court-stripping''--
that a legislative vote constitutes the whole of American democracy--is 
myopic because it ignores that the Constitution guarantees certain 
rights to all, regardless of the whims of the majority. These rights 
must be protected by the Judiciary. I am sure my colleagues agree with 
me that the popular choice is not always the right one, and that a 
Congressional majority is not the arbiter of universal truth.
  Discrepancies between Acts of Congress and the Constitution can 
always exist, so a body is necessary to adjudicate conflicts between 
the two sets of laws. Because courts fill this vital role and maintain 
American democracy, I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support 
this important legislation.

                          ____________________