**Previously Recorded by Phyllis Schlafly, 12/15/2008**
There is a great deal of discussion today about an alleged need for an independent judiciary and on how judges should decide the cases that come before them. Today is the anniversary of the ratification of our Bill of Rights, so it's a good day to reflect on a recent speech by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Here is how he summed up the duty of a judge, and the rest of this broadcast is quoted from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:
"To assure the independence of federal judges, the framers provided us with life tenure. … This independence, in tum, was to assure our neutrality and impartiality. … Yet, this independence can also insulate a judge from accountability for venturing beyond the proper role of a judge. What exactly is the proper role of a judge? … In every endeavor from economics to games, there is some way to measure performance."
Continuing to quote the words of Clarence Thomas: "For some commentators, it seems that if they like or prefer a particular policy or conduct, then it must be constitutional; while the policies that they do not prefer or like are unconstitutional.
Obviously, this approach cannot be right. … This is no way to run a railroad, not to mention interpret the Constitution….
"Let me put it this way; there are really only two ways to interpret the Constitution — try to discern as best we can what the framers intended OR make it up. No matter how ingenious, imaginative or artfully put, unless interpretive methodologies are tied to the original intent of the framers, they have no more basis in the Constitution than the latest football scores. To be sure, even the most conscientious effort to adhere to the original intent of the framers of our Constitution is flawed, as all methodologies and human institutions are; but at least originalism has the advantage of being legitimate and … impartial."