Thomas Jefferson, a stanch advocate of decentralized power, recognized that a federal government empowered to judge the extent of its own authority was one that would never remain limited in size or scope. Because of this, the power of the federal judiciary was always of great concern to him. The following is a small, but representative, sample of a number of Jefferson’s views on the power of the judicial branch of the federal government.
He said judicial tyranny made the Constitution “a thing of wax.”
If [as the Federalists say] “the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government,” … , then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de so. … The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they may please. It should be remembered, as an axiom of eternal truth in politics, that whatever power in any government is independent, is absolute also; in theory only, at first, while the spirit of the people is up, but in practice, as fast as that relaxes. Independence can be trusted nowhere but with the people in mass. They are inherently independent of all but moral law … — Letter to Judge Spencer Roane, Nov. 1819
Jefferson was plainly alarmed by the possibility of judicial tyranny.
You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges … and their power [are] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and are not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves … . When the legislative or executive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of the judges from that is quite dangerous enough. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. …. — Letter to Mr. Jarvis, Sept, 1820
Jefferson plainly had an answer against judicial tyranny.
This case of Marbury and Madison is continually cited by bench and bar, as if it were settled law, without any animadversions on its being merely an obiter dissertation of the Chief Justice … . But the Chief Justice says, “there must be an ultimate arbiter somewhere.” True, there must; but … . The ultimate arbiter is the people …. — Letter to Judge William Johnson, June 1823
He saw where judicial tyranny was leading.
When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated …. —Letter to C. Hammond, July 1821
He saw judicial tyranny as an undermining of the Constitution.
The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working underground to undermine our Constitution from a co-ordinate of a general and special government to a general supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet. … I will say, that “against this every man should raise his voice,” and, more, should uplift his arm … — Letter to Thomas Ritchie, Sept. 1820
Jefferson saw judicial tyranny as an all-out assault on the Constitution.
I fear, dear Sir, we are now in such another crisis [as when the Alien and Sedition Laws were enacted], with this difference only, that the judiciary branch is alone and single-handed in the present assaults on the Constitution. But its assaults are more sure and deadly, as from an agent seemingly passive and unassuming. — Letter to Mr. Nicholas, Dec. 1821
He saw judicial tyranny as the greatest danger to the nation.
… there is no danger I apprehend so much as the consolidation of our government by the noiseless, and therefore unalarming, instrumentality of the Supreme Court. — Letter to William Johnson, Mar. 1823
For judges to usurp the powers of the legislature is unconstitutional judicial tyranny.
… One single object … will entitle you to the endless gratitude of society; that of restraining judges from usurping legislation. — Letter to Edward Livingston, Mar. 1825
I find Jefferson’s words so fancy that it is hard to comprehend. I wish he just wrote plainly instead of trying to out-shakespeare everyone.
@onetenther T. Jefferson actually spoke very plainly for his time…..it is we who have been dumbed down so that we have difficulty comprehending such words. For many years, people were educated in very primitive conditions with few resources. However, their education was solid and stellar unlike our government-run brainwashing centers that produce non-functional illiterates. How very sad for all.
Jefferson’s observations are unparalleled, he was simple of understanding what existed around him and had great basis for decision making as he very clearly explained in our Declaration of Independence.
It is clearly written that it is the will of the people who uphold our constitution as the check and balances of the branches of Governments for history has shown clearly any opportunity to alter its path shall be taken. That Republics, (Life, public and politics) shall participate in upholding Liberty (freedom from any abusive or oppressive Governing body) for this cannot be done without the choice of the people (LIFE).
The Supreme court Judges are not the supreme deciders of the constitution, they are to be the supreme upholders of the Constitutional limits of Governing bodies and when they decide to change this course have they decided tyranny and oppression over the people. To decide authority over the PEOPLE (LIFE) is the oppressive act. To authorize themselves as the ultimate authority over as well the Governing bodies as the authority over is the oppressive act and it is the actions of these groups that provide the truth of the DECISIONS made by them for nothing takes place without such a CHOICE!
Clearly Thomas Jefferson had very valid concerns and did everything possible to WARN the people (LIFE) of such tyrannies and documented these truths in our Declaration of Independence for the PEOPLE (LIFE) in these sovereign states in this sovereign nation independent of such crimes and criminals. It is our own lack of honesty to ourselves, our lack of observation skills to identify these truths and use these as DECIDING factors in the direction of our communities as WE the PEOPLE or WE the LIFE or WE the DECIDING of these Communities, republics filled with public as well the DECIDING. The lack of recognition of ourselves in such a capacity our weakness, our lack of unity and our lack of decision for which all things take place.
There is no Constitution without We the People (the DECIDING) to demand its persistence for it is the CHOICE only that allows it to persist. The ignorance of the People is the only real tyranny to self as well the reason for poor decision making skills.
How is it that Jefferson could see 200 years in the future? Could it be that nothing is new under the sun. Government was to be feared in Jefferson’s day as it should be today, in relation to our liberty. Read your constitution, it does not take 5 people in black roles to tell us what is constitutional.
Those men in black robes are the reason Separate But Equal was legal. They are also the ones who struck down the post-Civil War Civil Rights Act the Radical Republicans passed – over a Presidential veto.
Jefferson and the other founders could see into the future cuz they saw the PAST,,,,like how we wear treated by England and how the Scott’s and Irish wear raped and murdered.,,,,,Then that carried over to the US between the north and south even before the war of Northern Aggression.
Unfortunately, Mr. Jefferson was correct in his analysis of the judiciary. Today’s judiciary has become as corrupt, if not more so, than our legislative bodies. They freely ignore settled case, statutory and/or constitutional law when it suits their numerous benefactors.
Keith Allison
This is an amazing article. My question however is how are The People meant to hold the Judiciary accountable? Thomas Jefferson related how it’s The People responsibility to raise our voices…..but how exactly are we to do that? How can we stay abreast of every item of concern that comes to the courts and how are we to voice our opnion? It’s not like I can vote the judges out…..how is it to be done? I want to know because I want to do something about it….I don’t mind the warm fuzzies that I get from reading things like this but it’s time that We The People return government to it’s original responsibilities. HOORAH!
@lbrown0715
In reality, there is but one way to try to hold judges accountable, and that is to haul their backsides into court and prosecute them under civil law. That in itself can become a time consuming and difficult task, and I say that from experience. However, when two judges deprived me of my civil/constitutional rights, I started researching the law and wrote the lawsuit myself because none of the attorneys I approached would dare hold judges accountable for their transgressions of the law.
Keith Allison
Hmmmm…..I seem to have found the answer to my own question. Nullification is the answer to holding all three branches of the government responsibile to Us. Wow. That really is a breath of fresh air. It means that you and I have the power and that We are the soverign. I live in Australia at the moment (although I was born and raised in the U.S.) and government here is WAY out of control. I believe that it’s even worse here than it is in the States….and I want to find the answer to the question as well: How do we (wheather the states or the people) hold Parliament responsibile for the laws they inact? Interesting…..thanks for posting this up! I look forwad to learning more. HOORAH!!
Thomas Jefferson knew the sinful human condition, a situation that has not changed through the ages. His sage advice has been disregarded, even sullied. Americans see we no longer have any “checks and balances” functioning in the District of Criminals. Government agents and officers not only ignore, but insult the US Constitution and our Bill of Rights. Their oaths of office are mere words to be forgotten. The Declaration of Independence is looked upon as an extremist manifesto by the feds fearing a slave rebellion. When people see the law is a meaningless tool of oppression lacking any semblance of justice, people lose respect for the law and the institutionalized organized crime it protects under the rubric of government. Our patriot forefathers would have “No king but Jesus!” Live free or die trying!
@DavidMcElroy
Oh yes the poor poor human condition, we are so victimized by our own thinking its not funny. Stop already, what happen to LIFE capable of ideas and choices? What about testing ideas to have certainty of results? What about learning for ourselves to teach ourselves good choice making skills? Oh ya those are all God given but YOU are going to try and convince me I am a lonely human incapable, SHUT UP!
Its about time Life pull its head out of the sand and realize US, our connection, our capacity and what we are truly capable of. There is only one authority over my Choice, ME. and no other holds any more nor any less so stop with the almighty over, I am done tiptoeing, lets get with it.
The Declaration of Independence is documented truths that were DECIDED upon to be free from and independent of British RULERS (pretend authorities) some acting in the name of some religious groups, (imagine that). Oh ya that was removed from the original version of the Documented truths by observations. And in order to make informed choices one would have to search out the truth not READ IT.
Decision is everything we have ever done and this is entirely observable and we are personally able to experience it aren’t we? and your own choice validates this point. So please let us make choices based on the documented truths decided upon for INDEPENDENCE and once again free ourselves from the rains of pretend AUTHORITY! We decided before and we are capable of deciding again if we only realize WE are the deciding. And take the human condition find a garbage can and throw that nonsense away because that is what it is period.
Hey, William Schooler! Why do you rail against my citing the “human condition”? We are in agreement, if you paid attention. Jefferson knew the propensity of the human ego and the fallibility of the human mind, and spoke boldly for independence versus the tyranny of the collective human government. Self-government is best. Jefferson professed Christ as Lord in ways that destroy claims he was a Deist, but he was wary of institutionalized religion and spoke against it. (Which he called “orthodox Christianity in finding no virtue there.) Thomas Jefferson was a great role model among mortal men, and I myself am a Christian libertarian of the Jeffersonian influence. Unless your “human condition” is absolutely perfect, perhaps your ego, your mind, could use some reforming introspection.
@DavidMcElroy
The day you take away the FACTs of your own God given capabilities to; create ideas and make decisions is not a doctrine of perfection, it is learning capacity. It means we are allowed to SCREW up and learn from screw ups and has nothing to do with conforming to some made up authority in your own mind. The human condition is made up by people just like you able to create ideas and then Decide this is it! Give me a break and stop already, the only authority you hold is over you, your own ideas and your own choices (get the heck over it).
I would also love to debate Thomas Jefferson with you but there is no need because Thomas Jefferson made it perfectly clear who to be weary of in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, it was others that did not want this truth revealed and THEY decided it will be removed. Since the Original draft was nothing more than Observed truths one should question ALL motives of CHOICE!
Was not the Bill of Rights crafted in a manner that made it a provisional acceptance agreement?
Did the framers not make it clear enough that if there were No Bill of Rights, then there was no agreement?
If this is true, Is not the constitution and all of the panoply associated with it not now a dead letter?
Even before the open and hostile rejection of the Bill of Rights; did not the creation and implementation of tens of thousands of nuclear instruments of genocide, breach the agreement and end the entire thing called government?
Are we not capable enough ourselves to be able to understand this?
Is the thought of nuclear war so unimaginable that we dare not even think about it?
If there now is a total eclipse of the law, then what are we to do about it?
How long of a general strike will be needed to put the purse in the hands of the people who fill it?
Is there any other way to give them the power to issue legal tender greenback again other than with a peaceful general strike?
Have we witnessed a certain degree of the truth of the saying that the power of the purse is the only power there is?
If we are ever going to accomplish anything in the way of bringing honesty and/or ethics to our federal courts, we are going to have to change federal judges from being appointed for life, to a condition where the electorate votes them into or out of office. As things stand, our federal judges are allowed lifetime tenure when they serve under conditions of good behavior. However, who determines whether they are serving under good behavior; the answer is the judges themselves make that decision, but from what I’ve personally seen, these judges do nothing more than protect their position as the final abiter of the legality of things. Unfortunately, the judges I’ve run into routinely violate their oaths of office with impunity and are never held accountable for their decisions which I suspect are often dependent upon how much they are paid under the table. It’s not just the federal judges who are corrupt, I have a documented incident where a Washington State Superior Court judge allowed himself to be approached off the bench because the plaintiff American and Washington Dental Associations promised he would receive a “nomination to be seated on a higher court.” And, even though I’ve brought this to the attention of the U.S. Department of Justice, nothing has ever been done to this judge.
Keith Allison
Hey! William Schooler! Why do kick against me? I essentially agree with you. Is the problem you find with me the fact that I am a Christian rather than an atheist? Jefferson professed to be a follower of Christ. And I believe our freedom to choose, or decide, is our God-given right of the most basic sort. God gave us a mind for a reason, and it wasn’t to surrender it to the tyrants of collective brain-washing. I believe public schools are a form of child abuse. It is said that those who will not be ruled by God will be ruled by tyrants. Christ, not institutional religion, leads us to the Way, the Truth, and the Life. And as Jesus said, “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.” Yes, God gives us the freedom to choose, for good or evil. But we must choose wisely, because we bear the costs of our decisions. Our forefathers knew this when they spoke of liberty correlated with responsibility. Men sin when they choose those things which degrade and destroy the truth and the way of life leading to a wholesome, healthy, harmonious, happy being our Creator desires for us in fulfilment.
@DavidMcElroy
WOW David, you can choose what ever you wish and the last I checked atheist do not believe in God but I personally do. The fact I totally disagree with your idea on the “human condition” as you call it is a bogus philosophy and if you want to believe it so be my guest but don’t be mad if I disagree with you. I don’t go around thinking we are all sinners either or we would not have been given CHOICE period. I have personally spent a lot of time making observations rather than believing all the crap people put in books and thats not a crime you know, it is a skill learned.
In fact when you realize it is life generating all these ideas can you realize it is very good to question “all” things and by doing so can find truth. But this is my experience with doing so, if that upsets you, or makes you upset please forgive me for sharing these experiences for there is no other way to express these but by honest statement. I think if you did a full study on Thomas Jefferson you would find some interesting statements about why he wrote what he did. I happen to fully agree with him.
Education in ALL spectrums today does not deliver the goods or we would experience them consistent. This not being the case would be the exact results of something false. NO group, no individual, no set of individuals has developed all the answers or all our questions would be answered and we would be on our way to full sustainment of life (the care for life) and life is not bad it is what ever you make it and in the case of a state what ever the state and those in it make it. And nothing, not one idea, not one concept, not one activity can take place without a choice to bring it about and as sure as I sit here not ALL choices are good ones (thank God) for if this were to be the case growth would simply be impossible.
Hey! William Schooler! If you really do stop and think, your own statements in your last reply prove my point very clearly, and we are agreeing on the point, but you are opposed to the terms of “the human condition”, the word “SIN”. As you said, our education is not consistent, nobody has all the answers, and sometimes we make poor choices. Those are all manifestations of sin. The term “sin”, biblically, means to be separated from God. All of us live in sin. To say you never sin would mean you are in harmonious integration with God, as Christ was. Can you truly say you deny being sinful?
@DavidMcElroy
Thank God we are not cloned and differ and you can make up anything you like to make you feel better about what you think. A poor choice is not a sin, it is a decision that is not in the best interest of life itself. It does not make it wrong right or indifferent, it simply makes it a lesson to be learned. Sure some wish to go around complicating the world so simple has no place but in every case of my discovery the truth was entirely simple to understand.
Yes I can honestly say I don’t sin, that I am not evil, that I have made poor choices and I don’t feel bad about it because I can accept I am allowed and capable to grow and understand me as life which helps me understand you as life. This is not a sin, it is an activity which by choice involves effort. I cannot be you and wont be you simply by choice and your choices are entirely yours to own, I am ok with that are you?