George Greer and “judicial activism”

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Ed Kilgore’s New Dem Dispatch yesterday about the Terry Schiavo case—set within a larger argument about activist judges—brings up a point I haven’t heard before:

Now, let’s take a look at those “robed masters” in Florida who Kristol says are trampling on democracy in so egregious a manner that Washington must intervene. Unlike federal judges, all Florida state judges serve limited terms of six years, and can be deposed by voters at the end of each term. Moreover, Florida’s Circuit Court judges, its trial judges, must face a non-partisan election every six years with opponents given every opportunity to run against them.

Consider Circuit Court judge George Greer, whom Kristol basically accuses of deciding, as an act of judicial arrogance, against saving Terri Schiavo’s life. Greer was re-elected by the voters of his circuit last year by a two-to-one margin, despite drawing an opponent who was strongly supported by those angry at his role in the Schiavo case.

Messing around on Google, you get a lot of hits for “George Greer” and “activist judges,” as one might expect, but it’s important to remember that the latter term doesn’t really mean anything. (In case anyone needs a refresher, read Don Herzog here, here, and here as to why, oddly enough, there’s no “one obvious interpretation” of the Constitution.) This goes double in Greer’s case. The courts approved of his decision. Voters approved of his decision. It was all part of a well-functioning democratic process. Obviously there will be people who disagree, and that’s fine, but in this case nearly everyone, it seems, save for Tom DeLay and some hyperactive right-wingers in Congress thought Greer did a fine job handling a hard case. So who, pray tell, is the activist here?


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend