Where are the people that understand the Constitution?

Discussion in 'US Constitution' started by capego, Jul 8, 2018.

  1. Natural Citizen
    Offline

    Natural Citizen Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,693
    Thanks Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    345
    Ratings:
    +3,915
    Something else people don't likely know is that there hasn't always been just 9 people on the SCOTUS throughout history. Nope. And for good reason. Why the heck should 1 person have the power to define the Constitution?

    No reason why there can't be 100 SC judges. Throughout history there have been 6, 5, back to 6, 9, 7, 10, 9...
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2018
  2. Natural Citizen
    Offline

    Natural Citizen Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,693
    Thanks Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    345
    Ratings:
    +3,915
    It's not there. You win the debate. :)

    They can pop off all they want, but their argument is just a bunch of white noise.

    You're right and they're wrong. Heh heh.
     
  3. Sunsettommy
    Offline

    Sunsettommy VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2018
    Messages:
    2,033
    Thanks Received:
    327
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,895
    You are fighting Hamilton on this because those papers (published in 1788) were written to help people understand various parts of the Constitution that was being ratified in 1789

    Wikipedia

    ""Federalist No. 78", also written by Hamilton, lays the groundwork for the doctrine of judicial review by federal courts of federal legislation or executive acts."

    You completely avoided this comment:

    "I have to ask the obvious question then, what is the Supreme Court supposed to do?

    Meanwhile when will you READ Federalist paper #78? "

    Here is a simple discussion of the paper:

    "In Federalist No. 78, Hamilton said that the Judiciary branch of the proposed government would be the weakest of the three branches because it had "no influence over either the sword or the purse, ...It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment." Federalist No. 78 quotes Montesquieu: "Of the three powers [...], the judiciary is next to nothing." There was little concern that the judiciary might be able to overpower the political branches; since Congress controlled the flow of money and the President the military, courts did not have nearly the same clout from a constitutional design standpoint. The Judiciary would depend on the political branches to uphold its judgments. Legal academics often argue over Hamilton's description of the judiciary as the "least dangerous" branch. Hamilton also explains how federal judges should retain life terms as long as those judges exhibit good behavior. [2]

    Federalist No. 78 discusses the power of judicial review. It argues that the federal courts have the duty to determine whether acts of Congress are constitutional and to follow the Constitution when there is inconsistency. Hamilton viewed this as a protection against abuse of power by Congress."
     
  4. Natural Citizen
    Offline

    Natural Citizen Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,693
    Thanks Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    345
    Ratings:
    +3,915
    Sunsettommy, I'll tell you what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna go onto the Fed 78 wiki page, I'm gonna edit it, and I'm gonna resolve it concisely. K?

    Wait for it. Maybe tonight, I'll do it, if I feel like it. And then I'm gonna lock it.


     
  5. Sunsettommy
    Offline

    Sunsettommy VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2018
    Messages:
    2,033
    Thanks Received:
    327
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,895
    Go ahead, and make a fool of yourself.

    I have the BOOK The Federalist Papers in my possession, which YOU can't edit. It clearly shows what Alexander Hamilton though about Judicial Power:

    Wiki correctly states:

    "Federalist No. 78 discusses the power of judicial review. It argues that the federal courts have the duty to determine whether acts of Congress are constitutional and to follow the Constitution when there is inconsistency. Hamilton viewed this as a protection against abuse of power by Congress."

    Go ahead be a fool.
     
  6. Natural Citizen
    Offline

    Natural Citizen Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,693
    Thanks Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    345
    Ratings:
    +3,915
    Oh, I do it all the time. Ha. That's how winning is done, Tommyboy. :)

    Hamilton's horse pucky created the outline for every single unconstitutional federal act we've seen. As well as the nationalization of every nonsensical issue in America.Hamilton was the architect for big government in America.

    ''Implied powers'' were never part of the plan. Which is why they're not found in Article III.

    It's no surprise to conservatives that our friends who are trustees in big government have an undying love for Hamilton. We get it.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2018
  7. Sunsettommy
    Offline

    Sunsettommy VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2018
    Messages:
    2,033
    Thanks Received:
    327
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +1,895
    When will you ever answer two questions I have asked you several times now?


    "I have to ask the obvious question then, what is the Supreme Court supposed to do?

    Meanwhile when will you READ Federalist paper #78? "
     
  8. Natural Citizen
    Offline

    Natural Citizen Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,693
    Thanks Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    345
    Ratings:
    +3,915
    Heck, truth be told, the majority of our elected ones are Hamiltonian.

    It's why people are having their pants pulled down at the airport just to fly from point A to point B. Crazy.
     
  9. EGR one
    Offline

    EGR one VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2018
    Messages:
    941
    Thanks Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    70
    Ratings:
    +769
    Pure BS. The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and case law can be overturned at any time that five lawyers decide to do so. The Constitution is not a guide, it is the law.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  10. EGR one
    Offline

    EGR one VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2018
    Messages:
    941
    Thanks Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    70
    Ratings:
    +769
    No, they do not.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

azs

,

news