That is outright WRONG WRONG WRONG! Because what this ABA president considers “independence” is, in the context of the public discussion on the subject, no doubt a defense of whatever judge follows a whim in his ruling.
FIRST: The U. S. Constitution CLEARLY and IN PLAIN ENGLISH says that CONGRESS sets the issues that the federal judiciary can rule on, except for the very scant few enumerated therein. SCOTUS has recognized this several times. Madison-Marbury was an unconstitutional seizure of the ultimate power to rule on constitutionality.
I know your law school academics taught you that SCOTUS case law was the last word on constitutionality but that only works because generally, everybody has just meekly gone along with it, and the worst abuses did not come into play (excepting a few rulings that trashed state sovereignty like Dred Scott, and then the unconstitutional war against the southern states by Abraham Lincoln). And pardon this obligatory disclaimer necessary today, I am against slavery more than any judge or politician.
SECOND: The U. S. Constitution is written in plain ENGLISH, not legalese. People who can read plain English can tell. It takes four years of Law School to disabuse people of this fact, apparently.
THIRD: If the Constitution is a dead document like some syntactically challenged assertions I have seen where they use the opposite word “living document”, then it is worthless. You then have the same effect of declaring the judicial branch supreme with a ruling clique of nine black-robed dictators. THAT idea is outrageous too.
FOURTH: The US Constitution was probably the best effort yet in history to balance natural God-given individual rights against attempts to overthrow it. It has been overthrown by a thousand cuts by judicial arrogance –that’s arrogance, not independence– and is the best evidence that the government that has resulted is an oppressive regime that has allowed the worst and darkest forces to thrive at our expense.