If a judge have power to punish for contempt, and to determine for himself what is a contempt, the whole administration of justice (or injustice, if he choose to make it so) is in his hands.
This highlights the dangers of unchecked judicial power, where a judge can define contempt and control justice.
Share
More from Lysander Spooner
There is no more absurdity in giving a jury a veto upon the laws, than there is in giving a veto to each of these other tribunals.
And nobody is bound to take the least notice of them, unless it be to trample them under foot, as usurpations.
All those who are not forbidden by law may be judges (jurors).
It is also sheer impudence, on their part, to assume that their commands are at all necessary to teach other men what is, and what is not, justice.