ACR137

Proposes a constitutional amendment authorizing the Legislature to invalidate certain court decisions.

A Concurrent Resolution proposing to add a new section IX to Article VI of the Constitution of the State of New Jersey.

Be It Resolved by the General Assembly of the State of New Jersey (the Senate concurring):

1. The following proposed amendment to the Constitution of the State of New Jersey is hereby agreed to:

1. a. As the people possess the exclusive authority to ordain or amend constitutions, all courts shall interpret this Constitution in a manner consistent with the intention of the people when ordaining or amending the same. Any court which declares an act of government contrary to the provisions of this Constitution shall do so in writing, setting forth in specific detail the section violated and the history of such provision which supports the decision. No court shall expand a constitution provision beyond, nor constrict a constitutional provision below, the scope actually intended by the people. As the power of the purse is solely that of the Legislature, no court shall issue any decision, whether under this Constitution or otherwise, which shall have the effect of compelling the State, or any of its subdivisions, to expend any money, or restraining the expenditure thereof, without the express consent of the Legislature. As the purpose of a Constitution is to establish and restrain government, the Judiciary shall not interpret this document so as to apply its provisions against private parties.

b. The Legislature may review any decision to determine if the decision violates the provisions of subsection a. of this Constitutional Amendment or is otherwise inconsistent with the intent of the Legislature. The Legislature may invalidate the decision, in whole or in part, by a vote of a two thirds majority of the authorized membership of each House in favor of a concurrent resolution providing for invalidation.

2. When this proposed amendment to the Constitution is finally agreed to pursuant to Article IX, paragraph 1 of the Constitution, it shall be submitted to the people at the next general election occurring more than three months after the final agreement and shall be published at least once in at least one newspaper of each county designated by the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the General Assembly and the Secretary of State, not less than three months prior to the general election.

3. This proposed amendment to the Constitution shall be submitted to the people at that election in the following manner and form:

There shall be printed on each official ballot to be used at the general election, the following:

a. In every municipality in which voting machines are not used, a legend which shall immediately precede the question, as follows:

If you favor the proposition printed below make a cross (X), plus (+), or check (•) in the square opposite the word "Yes." If you are opposed thereto make a cross (X), plus (+) or check (•) in the square opposite the word "No."

		A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AUTHORIZING THE LEGISLATURE TO INVALIDATE ANY COURT DECISION WHICH VIOLATES THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT OR IS OTHERWISE INCONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE.
	YES	Shall the amendment to Article VI of the New Jersey Constitution, which authorizes invalidation of any court decision in which it is determined by the Legislature that the decision violates the provisions of this Constitutional Amendment or is otherwise inconsistent with the intent of the Legislature, be approved?
		INTERPRETIVE STATEMENT
	NO	This constitutional amendment limits the authority of the court when the court issues a decision which is inconsistent with the intention of the people or the decision has the effect of compelling the State, or any of its subdivisions, to expend any money or restrain the expenditure thereof, without the express consent of the Legislature. This proposed constitutional amendment would authorize the Legislature by a two thirds majority vote of each House, to invalidate, in whole or in part, any decision made by the courts in which the Legislature determines that the court has violated the provisions of this constitutional amendment or is otherwise inconsistent with the intent of the Legislature. This constitutional amendment provides that, upon such a determination by the Legislature, the Legislature may invalidate the decision, in whole or in part, by a vote of a two thirds majority of the authorized membership of each House in favor of a concurrent resolution providing for invalidation.

For many years, courts in general, and the New Jersey Courts in particular, have arrogated unto themselves the authority to impose policy determinations upon an unwilling populace under the guise of "interpreting" the constitution. Too often, these determinations, on matters such as abortion, land use, and school funding, to cite just a few, are utterly and completely devoid of any hint of true constitutional authority, which is to say, the people, in establishing and amending the constitution, did not intend to divest themselves of the authority, speaking through their elected representatives, to address these matters.

It is the express intention of this proposed amendment to reverse the determinations made by the Court in cases such as: Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Mount Laurel Township, 67 N.J. 151 (1975) ("Mount Laurel I"); Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Mount Laurel Township, 92 N.J. 158 (1983) ("Mount Laurel II"); Right to Choose v. Byrne, 91 N.J. 287 (1982); Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer, 2000 WL 1146351 (2000); Robinson v. Cahill, 70 N.J. 155 (1976); Robinson v. Cahill, 69 N.J. 449 (1976); Robinson v. Cahill, 69 N.J. 133 (1975); Robinson v. Cahill, 63 N.J. 196 (1973); Robinson v. Cahill, 62 N.J. 473 (1973); Abbott v.Burke, 100 N.J. 269 (1985); Abbott v.Burke, 119 N.J. 287 (1990); Abbott v.Burke, 136 N.J. 444 (1994); Abbott v.Burke, 149 N.J. 145 (1996); Abbott v.Burke, 153 N.J. 480 (1997); Abbott v.Burke, 163 N.J. 95 (2000); Abbott v.Burke, 164 N.J. 84 (2000). It is also the express intention of this proposed amendment to return the authority over such matters to the people's elected representatives, where it properly belongs.

In addition, this Constitutional Amendment provides that the Court shall, when considering constitutional challenges to actions by government, interpret the provisions of the constitution consistently with the intention of the people adopting them.

The proposed amendment makes it clear that it is the people, not the courts, who establish the appropriate scope of constitutional provisions. Judges are not, simply by virtue of the office they hold, endowed with the authority to second guess the people, to "fill gaps" that the people might have left, to establish new rights, or to circumscribe old ones. To the extent that a particular provision of the Constitution may not be sufficient for modern circumstances, it is for the people not the courts, to address that change.

In the school funding cases, the courts have arrogated themselves the uniquely legislative power of determining what to spend and where to spend it. This is not an authority that the people have delegated to an unelected judiciary. This amendment ensures that the courts are deprived of any colorable jurisdiction to limit the authority of the Legislature to spend as it sees fit. At the same time, it preserves the ability of the court to act in such cases as the Legislature permits it to act, such as in tort claims cases, etc.

Moreover, the courts, in cases such as State v. Schmid, 84 N.J. 535 (1980), have taken it upon themselves to extend the provisions of the constitution to private parties. The purpose of establishing a Bill Rights is to limit what a government may properly do, not to limit the rights of private parties. The people, in ordaining the constitution, did not intend that its provisions should apply as against private parties. This amendment will ensure that courts are without jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of the constitution against purely private actors. This constitutional amendment provides that if the Legislature determines that any decision violates the provisions of this constitutional amendment or is otherwise inconsistent with the intent of the Legislature, the Legislature may invalidate the decision, in whole or in part, by a vote of a two thirds majority of the authorized membership of each House in favor of a concurrent resolution providing for invalidation.