The Recall of Decisions

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The United States and each state in the Union is governed by a written constitution, which limits the powers of the officers who conduct the government and defines the rights of the citizen. The Constitution of the United States also draws the line between the powers of the federal government and the powers of the several states. It is inevitable that questions should arise between state and nation, between the states and their citizens, and between individuals as to the construction of these constitutions, and some man or body of men must decide these questions or our system breaks down. Hitherto they have been decided by the courts, but it is now proposed that from their decisions an appeal should be taken to the people. Is this a reasonable proposal? It will be conceded generally that the law which controls us all should be certain so that every man can rely on it and govern himself accordingly; that courts should be no respecters of persons but should treat rich and poor, popular and unpopular alike, and that in order to secure such courts the judges should be wise, upright, courageous and impartial. No lover of justice can dispute any of these propositions. It must also be remembered that constitutions are laws adopted by the people as a whole to define the power of their rulers and to protect and secure the rights of minorities and individuals. Power can always guard itself and needs no protection, whether it rests on tradition, on military force, or on mere numbers. It is the weak and not the strong, the few and not the many who are in danger. The successive victories of liberty in the long contest against tyranny have always resulted in securing for the citizen some constitutional safeguard like Magna Charta, the Act of Settlement, the various provisions which are found in all our written constitutions, or the amendments adopted after the Civil War. The words which secure religious liberty, the right of petition, or the freedom of the press are not necessary to protect the man who agrees with the majority