Constitution: Missing in Action

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by PoliticalChic, Dec 20, 2012.

  1. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,955
    Thanks Received:
    15,716
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +25,087
    1. ‘Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The "supremacy clause" is the most important guarantor of national union. It assures that the Constitution and federal laws and treaties take precedence over state law and binds all judges to adhere to that principle in their courts. - United States Senate U.S. Senate: Reference Home > Constitution of the United States

    a. “The originalism looks to the original public-meaning of the Constitution and its amendments at the time they were enacted. The meaning of the Constitution must remain the same, until it is properly changed. And it cannot be changed unilaterally by the courts, or even by courts acting in conjunction with other branches of government.” Professor Randy Barnett, in “Originalism,” p. 262.

    b. Justices who abandon the original meaning of the text of the Constitution invariably end up substituting their own political philosophies for those of the framers. Americans have to decide whether they wish a government of laws or one of judges.

    c. As Alexander Hamilton put it in The Federalist No.78, it is the duty of judges “to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”





    2. “ Charles Evans Hughes, who would later become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, famously said about a century ago that the Constitution is “what the judges say it is.” Since judges cannot change the words of the Constitution, Hughes was really saying what today seems to be widely accepted, that the Constitution means whatever judges say it means. But if Hughes was right, then judges in effect become the Constitution and judicial review means that statutes must yield to judges.” What Is the Constitution? - By Orrin Hatch - The Corner - National Review Online

    a. “A century before Hughes, Chief Justice John Marshall offered the opposite view in Marbury v. Madison, the case often credited with establishing judicial review. Marshall wrote that we have a written Constitution so that the limits on government power “may not be mistaken, or forgotten” and that the Constitution is “a rule for the government of courts, as well as of the legislature.” Ibid.




    3. So….what has happened?
    Contemptible reprobates have lied about jurists who would support the Constitution, and, instead, installed lap-dogs of the Left who ravaged our heritage. An example by a murdering, treasonous scum:

    “Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is — and is often the only — protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy… President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice.” Kennedy, Bork and the Politics of Judicial Destruction - NYTimes.com



    4. When the American public was unable to see through this calumny, and slander, …the end of the Constitution, and of the American republic was writ large.
     
  2. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,955
    Thanks Received:
    15,716
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +25,087
    [Chief Justice John] Marshall wrote that the Constitution represents “the intention of the people.” Intention is expressed through the meaning, not merely the form, of words. The Constitution cannot be the intention of the people if all the people did was choose some words without meaning. The Constitution could not continue to be the intention of the people if its meaning could be changed by anyone but the people. Op.Cit.
     
  3. George Costanza
    Offline

    George Costanza A Friendly Liberal

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,087
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    Los Angeles area.
    Ratings:
    +1,187
    Article 5 provides for formal changes to the Constitution:

    A formal change to the Consitution involves actually changing the wording of the document itself and can only be accomplished through the process of Constitutional Amendment as set forth in Article 5, above.

    The meaning of specific Constitutional phrases (as opposed to the actual wording of the document) can be changed informally by way of judicial interpretation.

    There are other ways of changing the meaning of the Constitution informally. It can also be changed by presidential practice or custom and usage.

    Quoted portions from:

    The Constitution
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2012
  4. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,955
    Thanks Received:
    15,716
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +25,087


    1. Georgie....to what do you believe you are responding?


    Certainly you understand that my point is that the amendment process is the only basis for either changing the Constitution....

    ...and not finding imaginary 'penumbras'?




    2. "There are other ways of changing the meaning of the Constitution informally. It can also be changed by presidential practice or custom and usage."

    No it cannot.
    Each of your prescriptions is illegal.



    3. "When the Judicial Branch makes a decision in a court case, it explains what the words in the Constitution mean. This method of changing the Constitution informally is judicial interpretation."

    Totally false...but consistent with the teaching of progressive ideology.



    What is the fear progressives have of actually using the amendment process?
    I know....do you?

    It is fear of the will of the people.
    This is the case with every Leftist regime.....communist, socialist, nazi, liberal, progressive...whatever the nom de jure.



    I hope you have time to take a look at this:
    http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...-why-lawyers-don-t-understand-law-part-i.html
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2012
  5. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,277
    Thanks Received:
    14,924
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +37,089
    The Constitution was a great idea.

    RIP
     
  6. konradv
    Online

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,583
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,677
    Why are penumbras any less valid than an imaginary "originalism"? The theory presumes that all the Founders originally thought the same thing, an argument the borders on statistical impossibility.
     
  7. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,955
    Thanks Received:
    15,716
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +25,087
    See, here's the prob, konny......

    ...this tread is really meant for folks who understand the concepts involved.

    Originalism isn't imaginary: penumbras within the Constitution are.


    OK?


    Now, you go on back out to play, and I 'll let you know when it's dinner time.
     
  8. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,955
    Thanks Received:
    15,716
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +25,087
    And, in respectful remembrance.....



    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmLw4Q4KaFI]Oklahoma! The Original London Cast (1998) - Poor Jud Is Dead - YouTube[/ame]
     
  9. konradv
    Online

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,583
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,677
    You started a thread in which you purportedly excluded yourself? With which alternate personality am I corresponding? :cool:
     
  10. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,955
    Thanks Received:
    15,716
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +25,087


    That's kinda like '...so are you....'


    Sort of proves my point.
     

Share This Page