NEWS CLIPS

Attacks on ’Judicial Activism’ Unfounded and Meaningless

A new organization whose purpose appears to be to degrade the reputation of the Missouri judiciary is asking citizens throughout the state to "shine a light" on judicial activism. The Adam Smith Foundation, a concoction of various Republican activists, has placed billboards across the state, including two in Springfield, trying to convince Missourians that our state’s judiciary is "activist," whatever that’s supposed to mean. The billboards ask people to call new Missouri Supreme Court Chief Justice Laura Denvir Stith.

After visiting with Stith during an editorial board meeting last week, we hope those who see the billboards do call her.

As the new chief justice, Stith says she wants to focus on civic education. Like so many judges of both parties in the Missouri courts, she’s tired of baseless and empty attacks on the judiciary such as the implied criticism in the billboards. Stith believes the solution is education. She wants to improve efforts across the state to open up the court process, to "make it real" to citizens who sometimes don’t deal with the courts enough in their personal lives to understand how it works.

Stith and her colleagues will have to work overtime to turn the tide, with so many politicians, including Gov. Matt Blunt and House Speaker Rod Jetton, so often going to the "judicial activism" well. What’s telling this week is that the state Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision written by Justice Stephen Limbaugh Jr. — a Republican — overturned a state law passed by the Republican controlled House and Senate and signed by Blunt. The law, about campaign finance reform, was found to be unconstitutional. Overturning a recently approved state law is precisely the sort of action that generally earns charges of "judicial activism" or "legislating from the bench."

But Blunt and his allies didn’t use such phrases in lamenting — not criticizing — the decision.

Indeed, this adds fuel to our argument, and Stith’s, that the phrase judicial activism is meaningless. It’s purely tossed around by those who disagree with judges’ decisions and want to gain control of the judiciary. That’s why the efforts of the Adam Smith Foundation and others must be watched, and counter-acted, with the sort of educational efforts Stith proposes. The same lawmakers and out of state groups who this year tried unsuccessfully to gut Missouri’s nonpartisan plan of choosing judges, a plan that involves lawmakers, citizens and voters from a broad political spectrum, will be back next year trying again.

They want a system that would make it more likely that judges would be involved in nasty political campaigns, and the best and brightest would not necessarily be chosen for the bench.

"Why would we have a system that inherently brings disrespect to it," Stith asks?

Indeed, Missouri’s plan, as it exists, is better. Missouri has a balanced judiciary that serves its role of checking the power of the legislative and executive branches.

So we say to those who see the Adam Smith billboards, do as they suggest. Give Stith a call. Or better yet, call any of our local judges, Democrats and Republicans. Ask them for an education about the merits of Missouri’s judicial balance.

We think you’ll agree with us that attacks on our system of justice are unfounded.