Quotes About Judiciary

It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.

It is a sad day for our country when the moral foundation of our law and the acknowledgment of God has to be hidden from public view to appease a federal judge.

You can have an elected parliament that makes laws, but if the judiciary is appointed by the Supreme Leader - who is a representative of God - then you're kind of at an impasse.

Our constitution, in short, is a judge-made constitution, and it bears on its face all the features, good and bad, of judge-made law.

The reality is that our independent judiciary is the most respected branch of our government and the envy of the world.

The Supreme Court and courts in general have been usurping the role of the legislative branch of government.

Maintaining checks and balances on the power of the Judiciary Branch and the other two branches is vital to keep the form of government set up by our Founding Fathers.

The courts are truly the least dangerous of the three branches of our government.

Constitutional interpretation is not the business of the Court only, but also properly the business of all branches of government.

A Supreme Court decision does not establish a "supreme law of the land" that is binding on all persons and parts of government, henceforth and forevermore.

The President and the Congress are all very well in their way. They can say what they think they think, but it rests with the Supreme Court to decide what they have really thought.

An important function of the Supreme Court is to provide guidance, .. As a lower court judge, I appreciate clear guidance from the Supreme Court.

A judiciary independent of a king or executive alone, is a good thing; but independence of the will of the nation is a solecism, at least in a republican government.

I think the important thing about my appointment is not that I will decide cases as a woman, but that I am a woman who will get to decide cases.

We must come to see with the distinguished jurist of yesterday that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."

When a judge decides a constitutional question, when he decides what the people as a whole can and cannot do, the people should have the right to recall that decision if they think that it is wrong. We should hold the judiciary in all respect, but it is both absurd and degrading to make a fetish of a judge or of any one else.

Would it have been an improvement of the plan, to have united the Supreme Court with the Senate, in the formation of the court of impeachments? This union would certainly have been attended with several advantages; but would they not have been overbalanced by the signal disadvantage, already stated, arising from the agency of the same judges in the double prosecution to which the offender would be liable?

Scarcely any political question arises in the United States that is not resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question.

Judiciary must be encouraged to find ways and means to regulate its own affairs - consistent with the spirit of the Constitution.

The main reasons for the growth and institutionalization of corruption are: a culture of secrecy with lack of transparency, and weak institutions for securing the accountability of public servants, such as the Vigilance bodies, the criminal investigative agencies and the judiciary.

Well, in my job, I avoid political commentary.

Whatever final judgment awaits 'Bush v. Gore' in the annals of history, I am certain that the good work and good faith of the U.S. federal judiciary as a whole will continue to sustain public confidence at a level never beyond repair.

But the Supreme Court does not make sweeping changes in constitutional law by accident, or by its own design. Rather, the Court is limited to deciding the cases that the parties ask the Court to decide.

The sword of contempt has kept the judiciary away from searching public scrutiny, particularly within the mainstream media. The judiciary is obviously happy to live with this situation as well.