US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

The Right To Bear Arms

This is a discussion on The Right To Bear Arms within the Politics forums, part of the US Discussion category; Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag Quote: Originally Posted by regent Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag What part of Marbury did I get wrong? ...


Go Back   US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum > US Discussion > Politics

Politics Discuss government policies and candidates...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1561 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 03:22 PM
Registered User
Member #35264
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,732
Thanks: 222
Thanked 607 Times in 498 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 525
regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet regent is faster than a speeding bullet
Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by regent View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag View Post

What part of Marbury did I get wrong? The law they ruled unconstitutional clearly expanded the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which, also clearly, is unconstitutional.
No, the Judicial Act of 1789 expansion was piddling compared to the power the court had after Marbury. Original jurisdiction was down in black and white in the constitution and the congress had given it more OJ, and Marshall declared that and the whole act unconstitutional.
Marshall completely outfoxed the new president, Jefferson and his secretary of state, Madison. The Supreme Court became a powerhouse compared to the pre-Marshall Court. As I said, Marbury was the most famous and probably the most important judicial case in our history. It is a basic in political or history courses.
And we ended up with three branches of government instead of two.
No, originally there were three, but after Marbury the Court had significantly more power.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
USMessageBoard.com is the premier Political Forum Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see these ads. Please Register - It's Free!
  #1562 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 03:30 PM
TemplarKormac's Avatar
Hero of The Templar Order
Member #43268
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Athens, GA
Posts: 18,558
Thanks: 8,308
Thanked 7,492 Times in 4,752 Posts
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 12827
TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati
TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati TemplarKormac gives orders to the Illuminati
Quote: Originally Posted by EdwardBaiamonte View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by TemplarKormac View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by loinboy View Post
Why are you quoting Jefferson? He hardly had anything to do with the final version of the Constitution.

He was in Paris most of the time during its writing.
You're an idiot.

He was in Paris at the time of the Convention, but kept correspondence with James Madison to keep tabs on the proceedings in Philadelphia. He had plenty to do with the Constitution. He helped play a big role in the development of a limited Federal Government. Through his correspondences, he helped define the powers of the Constitution and the nature of the emerging republic.

Establishing A Federal Republic - Thomas Jefferson | Exhibitions - Library of Congress
Yes, Jefferson was mentor to Madison and then Madison became Jefferson's Secretary of State. Jefferson created the idea of freedom from liberal government when he wrote the Declaration. When he saw that Washington and the Federalists showed slight liberal tendencies he immediately created the Republican Party and forever destroyed the liberal Federalists! Jefferson called it Second American Revolution!!
Liberal? LIMITED government.

No sir/ma'am. What are you trying to pull?

Jefferson?s Arguments for Nullification and Limited Government ? Tenth Amendment Center
__________________
"It is easier to find a score of men wise enough to discover the truth than to find one intrepid enough, in the face of opposition, to stand up for it." -A.A.Hodge

"You cannot judge me. I am justice itself! We were meant for more than this! To protect the innocent! But if our precious laws bind you all to inaction ... then I will no longer stand as your brother." -Tyrael
Reply With Quote
  #1563 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 03:31 PM
Registered User
Member #34008
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 10,600
Thanks: 1
Thanked 938 Times in 789 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 379
EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by regent View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by regent View Post

No, the Judicial Act of 1789 expansion was piddling compared to the power the court had after Marbury. Original jurisdiction was down in black and white in the constitution and the congress had given it more OJ, and Marshall declared that and the whole act unconstitutional.
Marshall completely outfoxed the new president, Jefferson and his secretary of state, Madison. The Supreme Court became a powerhouse compared to the pre-Marshall Court. As I said, Marbury was the most famous and probably the most important judicial case in our history. It is a basic in political or history courses.
And we ended up with three branches of government instead of two.
No, originally there were three, but after Marbury the Court had significantly more power.
you mean 100 years after Marbury it had more power!!Chief Justice Reinquist was fond of telling us the Marbury was most significant case ever but that it was not used for 100 years after ruling!!
Reply With Quote
  #1564 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 04:51 PM
M14 Shooter's Avatar
The Light of Truth
Member #6581
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,425
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,875 Times in 1,399 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 814
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
Quote: Originally Posted by loinboy View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
It does not supprt your claim, and so it proves my point that you are arguing straw.
No one has argued what you said. No one.
You just want to argue semantics like a little teenager.
I'll take that as your acceptance of the fact that you know you cannot support your statement.

Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
This is a lie - The Heller decision did not reverse a single SCotUS decision.
Disagree? Cite them.
Further, you can show no such intent from the people who wrote, debates, or ratified the 2nd,
I've proven my point.
Another lie.
You know you cannot cite the SCotUS decisions overturned by Heller because none exist.
__________________
The dumbest statement ever made:
Quote: Originally Posted by Fender View Post
The US army is made up of civilians, making them the civilian militia that protects citizens.

Last edited by M14 Shooter; 04-14-2013 at 04:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1565 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 10:59 PM
Billo_Really's Avatar
Litre of the Band!
Member #2873
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Long Beach, Ca
Posts: 13,107
Thanks: 407
Thanked 3,397 Times in 2,688 Posts
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 947
Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve
Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
I'll take that as your acceptance of the fact that you know you cannot support your statement.
I've proven my point.

The fact that you refuse to acknowledge it, is not my problem.


Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Another lie.
You know you cannot cite the SCotUS decisions overturned by Heller because none exist.
You're trying to respond to something I didn't say.

I said 200 years of precedents, not past SCOTUS decisions.
__________________


I'm a kind, sensitive person, who cares
about the feelings of others, you asshole!
Reply With Quote
  #1566 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2013, 08:46 AM
M14 Shooter's Avatar
The Light of Truth
Member #6581
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,425
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,875 Times in 1,399 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 814
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
Quote: Originally Posted by loinboy View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
I'll take that as your acceptance of the fact that you know you cannot support your statement.
I've proven my point.
You have not supplied any evidence whatsoever that backs you claim.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge this simply illustrares your inteddelctual dishonesty.

Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Another lie.
You know you cannot cite the SCotUS decisions overturned by Heller because none exist.
You're trying to respond to something I didn't say.
I said 200 years of precedents, not past SCOTUS decisions.
Whenever the SCotUS overturns a case, it necessarily overturns precedent - never mind the fact that the SCotUS is not bound by precedent from the lower courts and that in Heller it UPHELD the lower court's decision.
But, I'll take note that you disagree with Brown v Baord of Education on the grounds that it overturned etablished precendent, and that you have no sound argument against Heller
__________________
The dumbest statement ever made:
Quote: Originally Posted by Fender View Post
The US army is made up of civilians, making them the civilian militia that protects citizens.

Last edited by M14 Shooter; 04-15-2013 at 09:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1567 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2013, 08:56 AM
blackhawk's Avatar
Registered User
Member #36422
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas.
Posts: 7,908
Thanks: 1,542
Thanked 3,803 Times in 2,339 Posts
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 4091
blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute
blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute blackhawk has a reputation beyond repute
Joe Biden mistook the right to bear arms to be about people wanting to wear tank tops and muscle shirts as a result he is calling for background checks and a seven day waiting period before you can purchase these types of shirts.
__________________
If you don't want a sarcastic answer then don't ask a stupid question.
Reply With Quote
  #1568 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2013, 11:06 AM
Billo_Really's Avatar
Litre of the Band!
Member #2873
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Long Beach, Ca
Posts: 13,107
Thanks: 407
Thanked 3,397 Times in 2,688 Posts
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 947
Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve
Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
You have not supplied any evidence whatsoever that backs you claim.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge this simply illustrares your inteddelctual dishonesty.
Yes I have, go back and look!

I provided links to back up my claim.

Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Whenever the SCotUS overturns a case, it necessarily overturns precedent -
In this case it did, bigtime!
__________________


I'm a kind, sensitive person, who cares
about the feelings of others, you asshole!
Reply With Quote
  #1569 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2013, 11:16 AM
M14 Shooter's Avatar
The Light of Truth
Member #6581
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,425
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,875 Times in 1,399 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 814
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
Quote: Originally Posted by loinboy View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
You have not supplied any evidence whatsoever that backs you claim.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge this simply illustrares your inteddelctual dishonesty.
Yes I have, go back and look!
I provided links to back up my claim.
This is a lie; none of the links you provided support the claim you made.
You made a very specific claim, and to back that up, you need very specific information.
You have failed to supply that information.

Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Whenever the SCotUS overturns a case, it necessarily overturns precedent -
In this case it did, bigtime!
Never mind the fact that:
-The SCotUS is not bound by precedent from the lower courts
-In Heller, the SCotUS UPHELD the lower court's decision.
-You disagree with Brown v Baord of Education on the grounds that it overturned etablished precendent
-You have no sound argument against Heller
__________________
The dumbest statement ever made:
Quote: Originally Posted by Fender View Post
The US army is made up of civilians, making them the civilian militia that protects citizens.

Last edited by M14 Shooter; 04-15-2013 at 11:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1570 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2013, 11:28 AM
Billo_Really's Avatar
Litre of the Band!
Member #2873
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Long Beach, Ca
Posts: 13,107
Thanks: 407
Thanked 3,397 Times in 2,688 Posts
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 947
Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve
Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve Billo_Really could run the Federal Reserve
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
This is a lie; none of the links you provided support the claim you made.
You made a very specific claim, and to back that up, you need very specific information.
You have failed to supply that information.
Your personal opinion of the evidence I provided, does not prove I provided no evidence at all.

Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Never mind the fact that:
-The SCotUS is not bound by precedent from the lower courts
-In Heller, the SCotUS UPHELD the lower court's decision.
-You disagree with Brown v Baord of Education on the grounds that it overturned etablished precendent
-You have no sound argument against Heller
The Heller decision did not give you the right to individually take up arms against the government.
__________________


I'm a kind, sensitive person, who cares
about the feelings of others, you asshole!
Reply With Quote
  #1571 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2013, 11:36 AM
M14 Shooter's Avatar
The Light of Truth
Member #6581
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,425
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1,875 Times in 1,399 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 814
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve M14 Shooter could run the Federal Reserve
Quote: Originally Posted by loinboy View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
This is a lie; none of the links you provided support the claim you made.
You made a very specific claim, and to back that up, you need very specific information.
You have failed to supply that information.
Your personal opinion of the evidence I provided, does not prove I provided no evidence at all.
Fact is that your evidence does not support what you claimed.
Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Never mind the fact that:
-The SCotUS is not bound by precedent from the lower courts
-In Heller, the SCotUS UPHELD the lower court's decision.
-You disagree with Brown v Baord of Education on the grounds that it overturned etablished precendent
-You have no sound argument against Heller
The Heller decision did not give you the right to individually take up arms against the government.
Irrelevant to the point made by the introduction of Heller into the conversation; the facts cited above remian unchallenged.
__________________
The dumbest statement ever made:
Quote: Originally Posted by Fender View Post
The US army is made up of civilians, making them the civilian militia that protects citizens.
Reply With Quote
  #1572 (permalink)  
Old 04-15-2013, 12:17 PM
Spoonman's Avatar
Flatware
Member #24208
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 16,231
Thanks: 1,399
Thanked 8,458 Times in 4,755 Posts
Mentioned: 82 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 31044
Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow
Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow Spoonman has a flying unicorn and lives on a rainbow
Quote: Originally Posted by loinboy View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
This is a lie; none of the links you provided support the claim you made.
You made a very specific claim, and to back that up, you need very specific information.
You have failed to supply that information.
Your personal opinion of the evidence I provided, does not prove I provided no evidence at all.

Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Never mind the fact that:
-The SCotUS is not bound by precedent from the lower courts
-In Heller, the SCotUS UPHELD the lower court's decision.
-You disagree with Brown v Baord of Education on the grounds that it overturned etablished precendent
-You have no sound argument against Heller
The Heller decision did not give you the right to individually take up arms against the government.
the second amendment did
Reply With Quote
  #1573 (permalink)  
Old 04-16-2013, 08:01 PM
Registered User
Member #34008
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 10,600
Thanks: 1
Thanked 938 Times in 789 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 379
EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness EdwardBaiamonte may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by Spoonman View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by loinboy View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
This is a lie; none of the links you provided support the claim you made.
You made a very specific claim, and to back that up, you need very specific information.
You have failed to supply that information.
Your personal opinion of the evidence I provided, does not prove I provided no evidence at all.

Quote: Originally Posted by M14 Shooter View Post
Never mind the fact that:
-The SCotUS is not bound by precedent from the lower courts
-In Heller, the SCotUS UPHELD the lower court's decision.
-You disagree with Brown v Baord of Education on the grounds that it overturned etablished precendent
-You have no sound argument against Heller
The Heller decision did not give you the right to individually take up arms against the government.
the second amendment did
liberals love to pretend its there so people can have fun hunting squirrels, rather than to keep liberals at bay!!
Reply With Quote
  #1574 (permalink)  
Old 04-16-2013, 08:18 PM
BreezeWood's Avatar
Supporting Member
Member #33449
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,606
Thanks: 181
Thanked 348 Times in 286 Posts
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 166
BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator BreezeWood could be State Senator
The solution is to require all public firearms to be lever or bolt action per round with non detachable magazines ... Constitutionally sound legislation.
__________________
.

"All's Well That Ends Well"
Reply With Quote
  #1575 (permalink)  
Old 04-16-2013, 08:19 PM
C_Clayton_Jones's Avatar
Lex dabit remedium
Member #29614
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: In a Republic, actually
Posts: 17,210
Thanks: 890
Thanked 7,142 Times in 4,973 Posts
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 4142
C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute
C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute C_Clayton_Jones has a reputation beyond repute
Quote: Originally Posted by regent View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by regent View Post

No, the Judicial Act of 1789 expansion was piddling compared to the power the court had after Marbury. Original jurisdiction was down in black and white in the constitution and the congress had given it more OJ, and Marshall declared that and the whole act unconstitutional.
Marshall completely outfoxed the new president, Jefferson and his secretary of state, Madison. The Supreme Court became a powerhouse compared to the pre-Marshall Court. As I said, Marbury was the most famous and probably the most important judicial case in our history. It is a basic in political or history courses.
And we ended up with three branches of government instead of two.
No, originally there were three, but after Marbury the Court had significantly more power.
Rather than ‘more’ power, let’s say the Court acknowledged in Marbury its existing authority as a co-equal with regard to the two other branches, where the doctrine of judicial review and the Court’s interpretive authority were already well established:

Quote:
The generation that framed the Constitution presumed that courts would declare void legislation that was repugnant or contrary to the Constitution. They held this presumption because of colonial American practice. By the early seventeenth century, English law subjected the by-laws of corporations to the requirement that they not be repugnant to the laws of the nation. The early English settlements in Virginia and Massachusetts were originally corporations and so these settlements were bound by the principle that colonial legislation could not be repugnant to the laws of England. Under this standard, colonial lawyers appealed approximately 250 cases from colonial courts to the English Privy Council, and the Crown reviewed over 8500 colonial acts.

After the American Revolution, this practice continued. State court judges voided state legislation inconsistent with their respective state constitutions. The Framers of the Constitution similarly presumed that judges would void legislation repugnant to the United States Constitution. Although a few Framers worried about the power, they expected it would exist. As James Madison stated, “A law violating a constitution established by the people themselves, would be considered by the Judges as null & void.” In fact, the word “Constitution” in the Supremacy Clause and the clause describing the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction appeared to give textual authorization for judicial enforcement of constitutional constraints on state and federal legislation. Indeed, before Marbury, Justice Chase observed that although the Court had never adjudicated whether the judiciary had the authority to declare laws contrary to the Constitution void, this authority was acknowledged by general opinion, the entire Supreme Court bar, and some of the Supreme Court Justices.

By 1803, as Chief Justice Marshall acknowledged in Marbury, “long and well established” principles answered “the question, whether an act, repugnant to the constitution, can become the law of the land.” Marshall concluded that “a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts . . . are bound by that instrument.” As such, contrary to the traditional account of Marbury, Marshall’s decision did not conjure judicial review out of thin air, but rather affirmed the well-established and long-practiced idea of limited legislative authority in the new context of the federal republic of the United States. In doing so, Marshall recommitted American constitutional law to a practice over four centuries old.

The Yale Law Journal Online - Why We Have Judicial Review
__________________
The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal Principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections. Justice Robert H. Jackson, West Virginia Board of Education vs. Barnette, 1943
Reply With Quote
Reply


Lower Navigation
Go Back   US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum > US Discussion > Politics
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Search tags for this page

the right to bear arms discussion

Click on a term to search our site for related topics.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:28 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.