Imperial Valley press., 1935-12-05
KEEP JUDGESHIPS
DiVORCED FROM POLITICS

Federal judgeships, rightly, are sup
posed to be divorced from politics Safe
guards have been thrown around them
to insure a maximum freedom from po-
litical influence. That the safeguards
are not entirely effective is partly the
fault of the judges, partly of politicians
and partly of the system of appoint
ments.
The extent to which politics is includ-
ed in federal court cases has been DEM
onstrated pretty thoroughly in recent
weeks. Preliminary ballyhoo leading
up to the 1886 elections includes attacks
on and counter attacks on behalf of New
Deal legislation, admittedly the most di-
vergent program of many years. Be-
cause so much of the legislation finally
comes to test in court, the eyes of poll
ticians are turned on the courts. New
Deal proponents quite naturally want to
see their laws sustained. Opponents
want reversals, which would furnish
powerful ammunition in a campaign.
If it ended there, no harm would be
done. If the politicians were content to
await developments in the court, with
out attempting to exert any influence,
there could be no complaint. If the
judges considered only their judicial
duties in the matter, forgetting personal
opinions as to the soundness or unsound-
ness of the New Deal, the primary inten-
tion of the courts would have been car
ried out. They are there to pass on one
question only, the question of constitu-
tionality 1t is the people who, in the
long run, will decide the economic sound
ness of the law
The ideal has by no means been at
tanned. In making appointments where
a federal iudgeship has been vacated by
death or resignation, those in power ma
turally appoint the men they believe will
see eye to eye with them. Herein lies the
danger of the present appointive system,
vet it is not such grave danger. The
men chosen to serve on the federal bench
usually are of high calibre. When they
allow personal prejudices to enter their
deliberations, however, there is grave
danger
One federal Judge, recently appointed
in Kentucky, disappointed the men who
appointed him by turning against the
New Deal entirely. He denounced the
administrations asserted ''trampling on
human rights and unwarranted delega-
tion of executive authority" More often
than not, he rules New Deal laws uncon-
stitutional Coming down to the
lower strata of federal court cases,
he freed an indicted narcotic ped
dler because he believed the majesty of
the government was besmirched when
agents were allowed to buy $50 worth
of narcotics in order to trap the peddler.
The man who cannot divorce his per-
sonal opinions and prejudices from his
judicial deliberations has no place on
any judges bench, federal or state. Re
gardless of the party or program he fav-
ors personally, he should forget his own
oh ho
course he is to follow in his deliberations
is set down for him. 1t is taken for
granted that he is well acquainted with
the law and its Interpretation. Opinion
plays no part there.
The Judge who does allow prejudice
to swav his findings is liable to reversal
by higher court. Meanwhile, however,
a great deal of harm might have been
done.
There is no place for politics in court
unless it is before the bench.
n