Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: stevelackner
But it was anticipated I believe by few if any of the friends of the Constitution, that a rule of construction would be introduced as broad & as pliant as what has occurred.

Madison's statement is ridiculous. It certainly WAS anticipated. But of course those who DID anticipate it were opponents of the Constitution, for that very reason:

They [the courts] will give the sense of every article of the constitution, that may from time to time come before them. And in their decisions they will not confine themselves to any fixed or established rules, but will determine, according to what appears to them, the reason and spirit of the constitution. The opinions of the supreme court, whatever they may be, will have the force of law; because there is no power provided in the constitution that can correct their errors, or control their adjudications. From this court there is no appeal. And I conceive the legislature themselves, cannot set aside a judgment of this court, because they are authorised by the constitution to decide in the last resort. The legislature must be controlled by the constitution, and not the constitution by them. They have therefore no more right to set aside any judgment pronounced upon the construction of the constitution, than they have to take from the president, the chief command of the army and navy, and commit it to some other person. The reason is plain; the judicial and executive derive their authority from the same source, that the legislature do theirs; and therefore in all cases, where the constitution does not make the one responsible to, or controllable by the other, they are altogether independent of each other.

The judicial power will operate to effect, in the most certain, but yet silent and imperceptible manner, what is evidently the tendency of the constitution: I mean, an entire subversion of the legislative, executive and judicial powers of the individual states. Every adjudication of the supreme court, on any question that may arise upon the nature and extent of the general government, will affect the limits of the state jurisdiction. In proportion as the former enlarge the exercise of their powers, will that of the latter be restricted.

That the judicial power of the United States, will lean strongly in favor of the general government, and will give such an explanation to the constitution, as will favor an extension of its jurisdiction, is very evident from a variety of considerations...

...This power in the judicial, will enable them to mould the government, into almost any shape they please.

From the 11th essay of "Brutus" taken from The New-York Journal, January 31, 1788.

Antifederalist #11

PS--I believe some "friends of the Constitution" knew full well this would happen--Hamilton, for one.

4 posted on 08/23/2011 7:22:04 PM PDT by Huck (I don't believe there is just one God--humanity seems like the work of a committee to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Huck

See http://www.stevelackner.com/2011/08/anti-federalists-were-right-how.html for my discussion of precisely that point about the Anti-Federalists and Supreme Court.


9 posted on 08/23/2011 7:39:46 PM PDT by stevelackner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Huck
That the judicial power of the United States, will lean strongly in favor of the general government, and will give such an explanation to the constitution, as will favor an extension of its jurisdiction, is very evident from a variety of considerations...

Absolutely right. Which is why the individual States must reclaim the right of Nullification, as a necessary check to the General Government and a compliant federal judiciary.

15 posted on 08/23/2011 9:22:44 PM PDT by John Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson