Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Fraulein
to uphold the constitution of the United States."

YOu left out, "to the best of my ability". He used his best judgment as to how the matter of constitutionality should be addressed and the forum to use. He chose the best forum to make the final judgment and not the temporary stopgap of the veto. There is a reason that the founders made sure a presidential veto only survived the term in office of any particular president.. You may want to read up on their views of the "imperial" presidency.

218 posted on 05/09/2003 11:56:13 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies ]


To: Texasforever
to uphold the constitution of the United States."
YOu left out, "to the best of my ability". He used his best judgment as to how the matter of constitutionality should be addressed and the forum to use.

Good catch. However, I disagree with his judgment here. There is no guarantee that SCOTUS will grant certiorari to address a bill that has been passed TWICE by the Right, when the Right will be the party claiming it is unConstitutional. That's playing dice with my beloved Constitution, and I don't like it.

He chose the best forum to make the final judgment and not the temporary stopgap of the veto.

Even IF SCOTUS grants cert, and even IF they vote the way that we hope, it STILL is not a permanent injunction against all assault weapons bans. The Left will merely read the language of the decision, rewrite the Ban with language that will not violate SCOTUS's reasoning, and ram it through Congress yet again. These are Leftist lawyers. Playing games with words and twisting them to do their bidding is what they do best. All President Bush accomplishes by promising to sign it is to further their aims, play the odds that someone else will fix the problem, and pass responsibility on to others. That is not what I want out of my elected leader.

229 posted on 05/10/2003 5:23:54 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]

To: Texasforever
Another quick point about relying on SCOTUS to rectify the AWB: SCOTUS historically and consistently has avoided addressing Second Amendment issues. They have ruled on it FOUR times in 220+ years. The odds are heavily against them granting cert to hear conservatives complain about a bill that they passed TWICE.
230 posted on 05/10/2003 5:29:36 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


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