John E. Jones III

Last updated

If you look at public polls in the United States, at any given time a significant percentage of Americans believe that it is acceptable to teach creationism in public high schools. And that gives rise to an assumption on the part of the public that judges should 'get with the program' and make decisions according to the popular will.

There's a problem with that. ... The framers of the Constitution, in their almost infinite wisdom, designed the legislative and executive branches under Articles I and II to be directly responsive to the public will. They designed the judiciary, under Article III, to be responsive not to the public will--in effect to be a bulwark against public will at any given time--but to be responsible to the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

That distinction, just like the role of precedent, tends to be lost in the analysis of judges' decisions, including my decision. [7]

In 2008, Jones was awarded the American Humanist Association's Humanist Religious Liberty Award at the World Humanist Congress in Washington, D.C. In his acceptance speech, Jones explained how he was blasted by Bill O'Reilly, Phyllis Schlafly, and Ann Coulter for the decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. Jones also remarked on the shortcomings of civics education and how the American public tends to have a limited understanding of the Constitution and the importance of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and separation of church and state established by the Founding Fathers of the United States. Jones gave his perspective on the separation of powers under the U.S. Constitution: "Articles 1 and 2 designate the legislative branch and the executive branch, respectively, as majoritarian—they are subject to the will of the people; they stand in popular elections. But article 3 is counter-majoritarian. The judicial branch protects against the tyranny of the majority. We are a bulwark against public opinion. And that was very much done with a purpose, and I think that it really has withstood the test of time. The judiciary is a check against the unconstitutional abuse and extension of power by the other branches of government." Jones added that Alexander Hamilton himself remarked: "Enthusiasm is certainly a very good thing but religious enthusiasm is, at least, a dangerous instrument." [8]

Whitewood v. Wolf (2014)

In 2014, Jones presided over Deb Whitewood et al. v. Michael Wolf, a case in which the plaintiffs sought relief from Pennsylvania's Marriage Laws (23 Pa. C.S. § 1102). He delivered an opinion striking down the Pennsylvania statute barring same-sex marriage on May 20, 2014, on grounds that it unconstitutionally infringed the plaintiffs rights of due process and equal protection guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He did not attach a stay to his order, so the decision would be immediately effective.

In 2014, Jones appeared on CNN to discuss same-sex marriage and the law he anticipated would be applied by the U.S. Supreme Court. [9]

Personal life

Jones is a Lutheran of Welsh descent. He married his wife, Beth Ann, in 1982. They have two children and three grandchildren. He has a share in a business operated by others in his family, Distinct Golf, which runs five golf courses in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.[ citation needed ]

Jones is a member of the board of regents of Mercersburg Academy. Jones is the 30th president of Dickinson College, a private, residential liberal arts college in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. [10] Jones also serves as co-chair of the Pennsylvania Commission on Judicial Independence. He was appointed by Chief Justice Roberts to the Judicial Security Committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States.

Awards, positions, and honors

John E. Jones III
Judge John E Jones III.jpg
Jones in 2005
30th President of Dickinson College
Incumbent
Assumed office
July 1, 2021

Related Research Articles

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), was a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States. The court ruled in an 8–0 decision that Pennsylvania's Nonpublic Elementary and Secondary Education Act from 1968 was unconstitutional and in an 8–1 decision that Rhode Island's 1969 Salary Supplement Act was unconstitutional, violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The act allowed the Superintendent of Public Schools to reimburse private schools for the salaries of teachers who taught in these private elementary schools from public textbooks and with public instructional materials.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial Yuan</span> Judicial branch of Taiwan

The Judicial Yuan is the judicial branch of the Republic of China. It runs the Constitutional Court and oversees all courts of Taiwan, including ordinary courts like the supreme court, high courts, district courts as well as special courts like administrative courts and disciplinary courts. By Taiwanese law, the Judicial Yuan holds the following powers:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Penn State Dickinson Law</span> Law school in Carlisle, Pennsylvania

Penn State Dickinson Law, formerly Dickinson School of Law, is a public law school in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. It is one of two separately accredited law schools of Pennsylvania State University.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary Act of 1789</span> United States law establishing the federal court system

The Judiciary Act of 1789 was a United States federal statute enacted on September 24, 1789, during the first session of the First United States Congress. It established the federal judiciary of the United States. Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution prescribed that the "judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and such inferior Courts" as Congress saw fit to establish. It made no provision for the composition or procedures of any of the courts, leaving this to Congress to decide.

<i>Of Pandas and People</i> Creationist supplementary textbook by Percival Davis and Dean H. Kenyon

Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins is a controversial 1989 school-level supplementary textbook written by Percival Davis and Dean H. Kenyon, edited by Charles Thaxton and published by the Texas-based Foundation for Thought and Ethics (FTE). The textbook endorses the pseudoscientific concept of intelligent design – the argument that life shows evidence of being designed by an intelligent agent which is not named specifically in the book, although proponents understand that it refers to the Christian God. The overview chapter was written by young Earth creationist Nancy Pearcey. They present various polemical arguments against the scientific theory of evolution. Before publication, early drafts used cognates of "creationist". After the Edwards v. Aguillard Supreme Court ruling that creationism is religion and not science, these were changed to refer to "intelligent design". The second edition published in 1993 included a contribution written by Michael Behe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">J. Harvie Wilkinson III</span> American judge (born 1944)

James Harvie Wilkinson III is an American jurist who serves as a United States circuit judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. His name has been raised at several junctures in the past as a possible nominee to the United States Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edith Jones</span> American judge (born 1949)

Edith Hollan Jones is a United States circuit judge and the former chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Federal tribunals in the United States are those tribunals established by the federal government of the United States for the purpose of resolving disputes involving or arising under federal laws, including questions about the constitutionality of such laws. Such tribunals include both Article III tribunals as well as adjudicative entities which are classified as Article I or Article IV tribunals. Some of the latter entities are also formally denominated as courts, but they do not enjoy certain protections afforded to Article III courts. These tribunals are described in reference to the article of the United States Constitution from which the tribunal's authority stems. The use of the term "tribunal" in this context as a blanket term to encompass both courts and other adjudicative entities comes from section 8 of Article I of the Constitution, which expressly grants Congress the power to constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Repent America (RA) is a Christian organization based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thomas More Law Center</span> Christian conservative law firm in Michigan, US

The Thomas More Law Center is a Christian, conservative, nonprofit, public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and active throughout the United States. According to the Thomas More Law Center website, its goals are to "preserve America's Judeo-Christian heritage, defend the religious freedom of Christians, restore time-honored moral and family values, protect the sanctity of human life, and promote a strong national defense and a free and sovereign United States of America."

<i>Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District</i> 2005 court case in Pennsylvania

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts testing a public school district policy that required the teaching of intelligent design (ID), ultimately found by the court to not be science. In October 2004, the Dover Area School District of York County, Pennsylvania, changed its biology teaching curriculum to require that intelligent design be presented as an alternative to evolution theory, and that Of Pandas and People, a textbook advocating intelligent design, was to be used as a reference book. The prominence of this textbook during the trial was such that the case is sometimes referred to as the Dover Panda Trial, a name which recalls the popular name of the Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee, 80 years earlier. The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and that the school board policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The judge's decision sparked considerable response from both supporters and critics.

The intelligent design movement has conducted an organized campaign largely in the United States that promotes a pseudoscientific, neo-creationist religious agenda calling for broad social, academic and political changes centering on intelligent design.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Roger Gregory</span> American judge (born 1953)

Roger Lee Gregory is an American lawyer who serves as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial review in the United States</span> Power of courts to review laws

In the United States, judicial review is the legal power of a court to determine if a statute, treaty, or administrative regulation contradicts or violates the provisions of existing law, a State Constitution, or ultimately the United States Constitution. While the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly define the power of judicial review, the authority for judicial review in the United States has been inferred from the structure, provisions, and history of the Constitution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">D. Brooks Smith</span> American judge (born 1951)

David Brookman "Brooks" Smith is a senior judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He was previously Chief Judge of both the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, and is the only judge in the history of the Third Circuit to have served as both a chief district judge and chief of the Court of Appeals.

The counter-majoritarian difficulty is a perceived problem with judicial review of legislative laws. As the term suggests, some oppose or see a problem with the judicial branch's ability to invalidate, overrule, or countermand laws that reflect the will of the majority.

Nullification, in United States constitutional history, is a legal theory that a state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal laws which they deem unconstitutional with respect to the United States Constitution. There are similar theories that any officer, jury, or individual may do the same. The theory of state nullification has never been legally upheld by federal courts, although jury nullification has.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Raven's Claw Society</span> Honor society at Dickinson College, US

The Raven's Claw Society is an all-male senior honor society at Dickinson College. It was founded in 1896, making it the first society unique to Dickinson College and one of the oldest in the country.

Cardozie Darnell Jones II is a senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The constitutional law of the United States is the body of law governing the interpretation and implementation of the United States Constitution. The subject concerns the scope of power of the United States federal government compared to the individual states and the fundamental rights of individuals. The ultimate authority upon the interpretation of the Constitution and the constitutionality of statutes, state and federal, lies with the Supreme Court of the United States.

References

  1. ↑ Miller, Mat (May 22, 2020). "Judge John E. Jones III to take over the helm of U.S. Middle District Court". pennlive. Retrieved June 1, 2020.
  2. ↑ Bad Frog Beer to 'intelligent design', Amy Worden, Philadelphia Inquirer October 16, 2005.
  3. ↑ "Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling" (PDF). December 20, 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 21, 2005. Retrieved December 14, 2013.
  4. 1 2 False judge makes mockery of case for 'intelligent design' Phyllis Schlafly Townhall.com January 2, 2006
  5. ↑ Dan Margolies (November 19, 2007). "Decision on murder case holds up". Kansas City Star. Retrieved 2008-03-23.[ dead link ]
  6. ↑ "Speech by U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III to the Anti-Defamation League National Executive Committee Meeting". Archived from the original on 2006-06-02.
  7. ↑ The Myth of "Activist Judges", an excerpt from remarks made on Nov. 26, 2006, hy Federal Judge John E. Jones at Bennington College's Ruth D. Ewing Lecture in Social Activism
  8. 1 2 Judge John E. Jones III, Inexorably toward Trial: Reflections on the Dover Case and the "Least Dangerous Branch," The Humanist, January/February 2009. "The Humanist - a magazine of critical inquiry and social concern". Archived from the original on 2011-06-13. Retrieved 2010-08-29..
  9. ↑ Mallonee, Mary Kay (9 January 2015). "U.S. Supreme Court to meet again on issue of gay marriage - CNNPolitics.com". CNN.
  10. ↑ https://www.dickinson.edu/homepage/1494/dickinson_college_president, May 7, 2008
  11. ↑ "TIME". Archived from the original on June 18, 2006.
  12. ↑ "Muhlenberg News". Archived from the original on 2007-07-14.
  13. ↑ "GSA press release - GSA 09-46: Judge Jones receives President's Medal, speaks at Darwin Day".
Legal offices
Preceded byJudge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
2002–2021		Succeeded by
Preceded byChief Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
2020–2021		Succeeded by
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.