The Founding Fathers established judicial independence as a central tenet of the Constitution of the United States in order to insulate federal judges from the President, the Congress, and the electorate. Yet because of the complicated nature of the Constitution and overlapping powers, the judiciary has not remained totally isolated from the legislative process. Our research has discovered hundreds of instances of federal jurists testifying before congressional committees on subjects such as court administration, federal jurisdiction, budgetary policy, and pending legislation in a variety of fields. Indeed, our findings buttress a key argument of Justice Robert H. Jackson's concurring opinion in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, from which we derive the main title of this article. In the Steel Seizure Case, Jackson asserted that "[wihile the Constitution diffuses power the better to secure liberty, it also contemplates that practice will integrate the dispersed powers into a workable government. It enjoins upon its branches separateness but interdependence, autonomy but reciprocity.
Rishikof, Harvey and Perry, Barbara A.
""Separateness but Interdependence, Autonomy but Reciprocity": A First Look at Federal Judges' Appearances Before Legislative Committees,"
Mercer Law Review: Vol. 46:
2, Article 5.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol46/iss2/5