You let Congress make the laws. You work with the Congress as the president to make sure that those laws are accurate and to the best of our ability, but you don't turn it over to the federal judges to make those laws.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Under our constitutional system, the executive executes the laws that Congress has passed. It should not be executing laws that Congress has rejected.
Rather than waiting for future trials to determine rules that will impact every citizen, Congress should step in and write a law that takes every American's rights into consideration.
A federal judge did as he was supposed to do and upheld the Constitution. We should be thankful that we have judiciary that will do that.
Judges should always behave judicially by adjudicating, never politically by legislating. I leave policy to policymakers. They're preeminent, but they're not omnipotent. In other words, lawmakers decide if laws pass, but judges decide if laws pass muster.
Our role as judges is to interpret the law.
The Constitution overrides a statute, but a statute, if consistent with the Constitution, overrides the law of judges. In this sense, judge-made law is secondary and subordinate to the law that is made by legislators.
Congress should pass legislation to remove from the federal courts their jurisdiction to hear these outrageous challenges to the Ten Commandments and the Pledge of Allegiance.
Judges should interpret the law, not make it.
It is essential to democracy that the elected representatives of the people make the laws that govern this country - and not the judges.
What right does Congress have to go around making laws just because they deem it necessary?