The Limits of the Court
It is troubling to me that the legislature has created a double standard. Why do we have two crimes that may be charged for exactly the same act, done with exactly the same intent, causing exactly the same devastation to the victim, but with dramatically different consequences for the actor?– Justice Tom Chambers, State of Washington v. Jacob Gamble (Concurrence)
The central theme in many of the Supreme Court’s cases this year has been trust. Trust was the driving force in Niemann v. Vaughn Community Church and Jessy A. Ang ,M.D., and Editha A. Ang, et al., v. Michael G. Martin and Jane Doe Martin, et al.. Additionally, the court has reviewed several cases for abuse – or even simple use – of judicial discretion. My favorite case of the year ruled in State of Washington, Respondent V Van Ronald Pulfrey, Petitioner by giving police officers the right to “time shift” (to borrow from Betamax) their discretion as long as they exercise it at some point during the flow of the original stop. As the justices become more and more invested in their investigation of trust, they are generating more concurrences and dissents. Are they becoming less trustful of each other?
Justice Chambers, in these two sentences, vents his frustration at two parts of the justice system entirely out of his control. He begins by expressing his frustration with the legislature, which is nothing new. Courts have been complaining about legislatures since they were forced to co-exist. However his anger is not the generalized and perpetual sort. Justice Chambers’s anger is specific – he is troubled by the legislature requiring the courts to trust prosecutors. The choice of crime with which a citizen is charged with is one of the few unreviewable decisions in the legal system; it is also one of the most important (please see the Micah Painter case for example).
The job of Supreme Court justice is not wholly unlike the job of a sheep dog. The Justice must corral a mob of unruly actors with the aim of keeping the whole justice system moving in the same direction. Their responsibility is to the group as a whole, but they only get to work on the fringes, the outlying cases – and even there they may only bark, growl, and nip about the heel. Chambers sees unfairness in the center of the herd, but he is prevented from doing anything about it. His frustration is noble, but not one I share.
Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.