I have written a great deal over the years expressing concern about the politicization of the judiciary. For example, in this piece from Confirm Them, I tried to make an exhaustive case against the politicization of the federal judiciary through the Senate’s confirmation process.

In today’s Washington Post, legal analyst Andrew Cohen reveals three egregious examples of efforts to politicize state courts through citizen initiatives.

The most absurd, in South Dakota, would actually allow parties to sue judges for rulings. In Colorado, a former State Senator is pushing a ballot measure to impose term limits on appellate judges. In Montana, there’s a proposal that would allow citizen recall of judges at any time for any reason.

As Cohen points out, such proposals are as dangerous as they are stupid. “Remember,” Cohen reminds us, “judges when interpreting the Bill of Rights are the only checks against the tyranny of the majority.” But these proposals all make the judiciary firmly subject to the whims of that majority. So much for the protection of the law.

To be sure, there are too many examples in recent years of judges acting beyond precedent, ignoring the Constitution, and handing down rulings that seem based on little more than their own personal views.

But these mistakes are symptoms, not the problem. Selecting judges who will put aside personal agendas and follow the law and the Constitution is the only solution. And insulating our judges from the day to day tide of politics remains essential.