Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

The Seattle Times

Nation & World


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Originally published Thursday, January 18, 2007 at 12:00 AM

E-mail article     Print view

Gonzales says judges unfit to rule on national security

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales criticized federal judges Wednesday for ruling on cases that affect national-security policy. Judges, he contended, are...

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Alberto Gonzales criticized federal judges Wednesday for ruling on cases that affect national-security policy. Judges, he contended, are unqualified to decide terrorism issues that he said are best settled by Congress or the president.

In a sharply worded speech directed at the third, and equal, branch of the government, Gonzales outlined some of the qualities the Bush administration looks for when selecting candidates for the federal bench. He condemned what he termed "activist" judges with lifetime appointments who "undermine the right of the people to govern themselves."

In nominating a judge, "we want to determine whether he understands the inherent limits that make an unelected judiciary inferior to Congress or the president in making policy judgments," Gonzales said in the 20-minute speech to American Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington think tank. "That, for example, a judge will never be in the best position to know what is in the national-security interests of our country."

Gonzales did not cite any specific activist jurists or give examples of national-security cases.

Pressed later for examples, he noted that Congress approved the Military Commissions Act, which authorizes military trials for terrorism suspects, four months after the Supreme Court ruled the trials would violate U.S. and international law.

"I don't think the judiciary is equipped at all to make decisions about what's in the national-security interests of our country," Gonzales said. "How would they go about doing that? They don't have embassies around the world to give them that information. They don't have intelligence agencies gathering up intelligence information. ... It was never intended that they would have that role."

Carl Tobias, a constitutional-law professor at the University of Richmond in Virginia, said it is inevitable that courts would decide some of the most contentious questions involving national security.

"Some of the most difficult issues are about national security, how to balance national security and civil liberties — especially in the context of domestic surveillance and enemy combatants," Tobias said. "Those are critically important issues that the courts are being asked to resolve."

Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company

More Nation & World headlines...

E-mail article Print view      Share:    Digg     Newsvine

advertising

First key vote today on Senate health bill

Conflicting blast reports reflect fear in Pakistan

Genetics anti-bias law takes effect

Senate panel reveals more troubling e-mails from Fort Hood suspect

Floods ravage UK region

Advertising

Video

LA Galaxy's David Beckham
Los Angeles Galaxy's David Beckham talks about the upcoming MLS Cup final during after a team practice.

Real Salt Lake's Kyle Beckerman
MLS trophy arrives in Seattle
Chittenden Locks Inspection
Full interview with New Moon actors
Interview with New Moon actors
Artistic Roller Skating
Girls Soccer: Mercer Island vs. Glacier Peak
Smash Putt! Miniature Golf
Opening day at Crystal Mountain

Marketplace

nwautos

2009's most fuel-efficient sedansnew
Choosing a new sedan? Weigh the impact of your choice on your wallet and on the planet.
Post a comment

Open Houses

Find this weekend's open house listings.
Or search by location:

 
Most read
Most commented
Most e-mailed
 
 
Advertising