Wrong,we have soldiers out there defending it and us.
Posted on 03/03/2005 6:39:14 PM PST by mdittmar
The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
Section. 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
Yup, and notice there's nothing in there about judicial review. That's right--it's (gasp) unconstitutional. Just think about how silly it is. For a bill to become a law, it must first pass 2 houses of Congress and then be signed by the President. Thus, at the very least, 270 people must have voted for it (218 in House, 51 in Sentate, and the president). It must pass through 2 branches (unless a supermajority in Congress overrules a veto).
Now look at the SCOTUS. Only 5 must rule a certain way. The idea that they can rule an act unconstitutional where 270+ had said it was is absurd. All the branches swear to uphold the constitution--it is not within the SCOTUS' authority.
The SCOTUS was meant to be the final court of appeals. That's it. Not the mystical platonic guardians they seem to consider themselves. It's a farce. Does Congress pass bad laws? Of course. Does SCOTUS render bad judgments. Many, many times. I'll bet that a process in which 270+ participate, and who are directly accountable to the people, gets it right more often than an isolated and clueless pack of lawyers.
What are the legal options? As I understand impeachment and legislative action are a possibility. But I have read very little on conservative sites with recommendations for specific action.
Section 1: "....as Congress from time to time ordain and establish...
"Judges......shall hold their offices during good Behavior".....
2. Section 2 is about Jurisdiction. Show me where the federal just have juristiction on State laws or constitutions. Yet they (Federal Judges) had usurp that authority when they claim such authority. Note that the word "constitution" is singular - therefor it pertains only to the US Constitution. No where that this section say that when a Federal Judge or for that matter the Supreme Court = that Congress should recognize it as law. Yet it is done all the time.
3. Also note that the US Constitution recognizes independence of the other states even implying that Congress will not promulgate a law that is reserved for the States.
Does this mean a state can ignore a SCOTUS ruling?
Alas, the 14th Amendment pretty much trashed the notion of state sovereignty:
Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.Section. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
By Jove!!! I think you've got it!!!
The review of the proposed legislation passes before 100 people in the senate, 435 in the house of representatives and the president before it can become law. That's 536 people whether they vote for it or not, they, and no one else, have the authority to consider it. Nowhere in there is there a mention of any court participating in the creation of laws!
Good point! I didn't even consider those who have a chance to review it, only those who actually vote for it. You're right, the courts have usurped power from those who are meant to wield it, and it has assumed "the cloak of legality" (to quote Byrd) from years of tradition.
I want to fight back. Simply ignore the court. They do not respect our constitution; we should not respect it (I read a similar line earlier today--can't recall its originator). Even the "good" members of the Court participate in the mockery. Hopefully the death penalty case will cause more folks to open their eyes. If the jokers on the bench rule the wrong way on the 10 commandments case, you better believe that there will be fallout!
We're on the same side...
yes, its too bad the SCOTUS over-ruled the Constitution huh?
The numbers a proposed law passes by in the house and senate is deceiving. Far too many of those reps and senators do not read most bills in their entirety, if at all. So how can they be considered a check and balance if they do not know content?
We need fewer new laws and more attention to enforcing or ridding ourselves of existing ones
Yeah, like enforcing the immigration laws?
Making laws that stick nowadays are a lot like playing scrabble, just a word game.
SPOTREP - WV - LAW
United We stand, divided We fall. Our courts are dividing us by forcing multiculturalism on us instead of respecting our traditional rights as Americans. American immigrants blended just fine the past 200 years, it has just been the past 2 decades that suddenly we are forced to accept diversity and stray from the formula that made America successful.
A cat cannot be treated equal in a dogs world. That is nature, so as humans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.