Federal Judges – Enforce or Interpret the Law?

Criminal Justice
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date
Federal Judges Enforce and Interpret the Law
The Ruling and the Rationale
Decision: The artist should be convicted for obscene representation of sexual abuse of children
Rationale: Federal Statutory laws prohibit obscenity associated with children under section 1470 of Title 18 and section 1466A of Title 18 of the United States’ Code. According to the provision, any individual who intentionally represents or attempts to represent through electronic, drawings, painting or cartoons that appear to depict minors being involved in sexually explicit behavior is culpable for obscenity (McKee, 2011). In the drawing, some sexual minority groups are represented, which may tend to suggest that it the artwork is advocating for the rights of the LGBT community. Most states and federal laws recognize the rights of sexual minority groups in but prohibit pedophilic behaviors. In this sense, the artwork does not promote public morality because of the violation of children rights. Sex with minors is unlawful in the federal judicial law, and the artist may serve not less than ten years in jail if the Federal Judges prove beyond reasonable doubt that the artwork promotes sexual acts with the minors (Spooner & Wright, 2014).
Dismissing Personal Bias from the Decision
This decision is completely free from personal feelings because it is clearly defined in the Federal Statutory laws. The other forms of sexual acts represented in the artwork cannot overturn the decision reached through analyzing the unlawful representation of children.

The acts of necrophilia, bestiality and sadomasochism represent sexual minority groups that are having different legal interpretations across state laws. The federal laws recognize the rights of sexual minorities, although the constitution fails to offer protection against discrimination of the sexual minority group (McKee, 2011). The artist would be free from prosecution and conviction if the representation did not include children. The question as to whether pedophiles fall among sexual minority group is still controversial and cannot form the basis for judging this particular case. It is estimated that one per cent of males are pedophiles. Being pedophilic does not mean that one engages in sexual acts with children, but it is a mental disorder that makes men associate themselves with children even after passing the puberty stage. Whether this is true or false, the act of obscene representation of children is the promotion of social immorality and infringes on the rights of children. The artwork is set to create public attention in during an important public exhibition meaning that its impacts on the society will be immense. Obscenity through other forms such as the internet target specific people or groups and only those who wish to visit the sites suffer the evils of the act. However, in this particular act, anybody can be affected since it is all about bumping into the graffiti while visiting the gallery.
If the Judiciary is not Independent of Political powers, Democracy is under Threat
If the judiciary is not independent of political powers, then the due process of law is a sham and democracy is under threat. The judiciary system should not derive its strength from political forces. In the first case, judges are usually appointed but not elected. As such, they do not act or implement their duties under political pressures and should not worry about their reelection. The most important powers that the judiciary has over the political control is that of judicial review where the judiciary possesses the powers to interpret the constitution (Cohen, 2014). The Constitution is made by the legislative bodies that comprise of politicians and hand it over to the judiciary which has the mandate to interpret the law. Although the constitution does not grant the Supreme Court powers for judicial review, it grants it the power to change laws and take actions. Constructionists believe that judges should enforce the law while activists believe that judges should interpret the law. However, it appears that the two aspects are inseparable, the power to enforce the law comes from the ability to understand the provisions of the law. Enforcement of the law comes with the confidence that a judge has in making a verdict based on the knowledge she/he has in the judicial matters.
Judges should Interpret and Enforce the Law
Whenever the federal judges rule out that government actions of particular laws violate the supremacy of the constitution, they shape the public policy. The Supreme Court can overturn court rulings at state levels and make its ruling depending on the interpretation of the constitution and the powers of the judges (Wald, 2010). However, the judges have the responsibility to protect the Constitution in as much as they have power over political pressures. Their independence from political control does not provide room for violation of the constitution for favorable rulings and personal gains. As such, the legislators have a right to file a suit against judges who enforce the law for their interests. Surprisingly, the Supreme Court can overrule itself by changing a decision that it had made previously. In the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education overturned the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson that had legalized the doctrine of separate but equal in learning institutions. The Judges of the Supreme Court have the authority to change for the purpose of bettering what was initially oppressive and politically instigative to a decision that protects the integrity of the institution (Wald, 2010). Therefore, judges should interpret the law and use their authority to enforce it as much as the overall decision promotes justice.
References
Cohen, A. (2014). Independent judicial review: A blessing in disguise. International Review of
Law and Economics, 37, 209-220.
McKee, K. A. (2011). It’s 10 PM Do You Know Where Your Children Are?. Regent University
Law Review, 23.
Spooner, K., & Wright, R. G. (2014). The Criminalization of Adolescent Sexuality. Sex Offender
Laws: Failed Policies, New Directions.
Wald, E. (2010). Should Judges Regulate Lawyers?. McGeorge Law Review, 42, 149.