The Nature of the Judicial Process

Abstract

Contradictory decisions by the United States Supreme Court are motivated by the judicial ideology that the United States has unlimited authority. That pleases the court, although contradictory decisions exclude the Rule of Law, elements of which are principled decisions and foreseeable applications of principles, and although unlimited authority is in opposition to the Constitution.

Rights are nullified by shifting constitutional boundaries. It used to be that a warrantless arrest had to be based on probable cause. Nowadays, an arrest (called a 'stop') may be based on suspicion. The constitutional right to be free from warrantless arrest absent probable cause was transformed by the Supreme Court into a license to be free to that extent.

There was no way to foresee that the Supreme Court was going to adopt the policy that a warrantless arrest absent probable cause is constitutional. Supreme Court justices disregard the Constitution in consequence of the quid pro quo for judicial employment: tending to the needs of the United States. Consistency in decision-making means repeatedly benefiting the United States. Other considerations are secondary. The consequence is a plethora of contradictory decisions.

The Supreme Court is a coterie of policy-makers, not a court. Decisions by the Supreme Court murdered the Constitution penned by the Framers. The lifeless parchment was mummified, and is maintained in a latter-day pyramid by the National Archives and Records Administration.

What is to be done? Amendment of Article III is required. Four amendments to Article III are suggested. The amendments would generate reestablishment in the United States of constitutional government.

Keywords: article III, article V, constitution, interpretation, justices, Supreme Court

JEL Classification: K19, K39, K49