This could potentially open a huge bucket of worms.

Supreme Court (AP) If parents want to sue public school districts in federal court over the special education needs of their children, should they have to hire a lawyer?  It’s an issue that’s been heard today before the Supreme Court.

A lawyer for an Ohio couple with an autistic child told the justices they shouldn’t be prevented from fighting for changes in their child’s education just because they can’t afford a lawyer.

In this case, by the way, he’s representing them for free.

What an absurd case.  Of course you have to hire your own lawyer if you want to sue somebody.  I don’t see why the taxpayers should not only have to pay for the legal system in which these lawsuits are heard, and the lawyers to defend government policy, but also the lawyers for the people suing as well.

If you ask me, this is indicative of just how reliant we’ve become upon lawsuits in this country.  When our founders developed our system of government the thought was power would be distributed locally among the states and communities of the country so that a vote of the people in any given locality could effect necessary change.  Since then, however, we’ve gotten in the habit of trying to bypass the often lengthy legislative/referendum process and started relying directly on the courts to effect change through judicial fiat.

Take these parents, for instance.  They feel that their child is entitled to a different sort of education than he’s getting now.  But rather than lobby the school administrators, the local school board or their state legislators they’re suing the school district.  But that’s not how it’s supposed to work.  If you want change in government you’re supposed to lobby your representatives in government.  Or vote them out of office.  That sort of thing is free.  Or, at least, you don’t necessarily have to hire anybody to do it for you.

But these parents apparently don’t have the patience for that.  They want to sue so they can get some judge to tell the school district to make the changes they want without having to convince a legislator or a majority of their fellow citizens that the changes are actually needed.  And they expect the taxpayers to shell out funds for the changes as well.  Just as they expect the taxpayers to pay for their lawyer.

And this isn’t the only instance where this sort of thing is happening.  Look at gay marriage.  People want it legalized, but rather than focusing on convincing lawmakers or a majority of their fellow citizens to do so they’re filing lawsuits to get judges to order the changes they want.

That isn’t democracy folks.  If I were sitting on the Supreme Court I’d tell these people to hire their own lawyer.  That might not sit well with the bleeding hearts, or the trial lawyers who would love to see taxpayers foot the bill for all the lawsuits they want to file against the state, but that’s how this country is supposed to work.