At the root of the voter resentment sweeping the state this year is a belief that Vermont's democratic political process was hijacked by a politicized Supreme Court that embarked on a liberal social agenda without benefit of constitutional support, aided by a legislature whose leadership was eager to immediately carry out the Court's instructions in the face of widespread public opposition.
Judicial independence is an important value.
On constitutional questions, especially, the people ought to give the benefit of the doubt to judges even when their rulings are unpopular. But that deference is due only to a Court which has the self- discipline to interpret the plain language of the document, considers the meaning as understood by those who framed it, gives heavy weight to years of judicial precedent, and holds the view that when changes in an 18th century constitution are required, they must be made ultimately with the approval of the people through the amendment process. The present Supreme Court clearly flunks that reasonable and long accepted test. Until 1974 there was a relatively straightforward remedy. Justices were subject to reelection by the legislature every two years.