Replies

(sigh)

Where to begin with you?

My interpretation of the Supreme Court's rulings, as you put it, is simply reading and understanding what the Court said. Define for me, through subsequent Court rulings, where that understanding of the Court's ruling is wrong!

Secondly, whether you agree with the Court or disagree with the Court, you cannot relegate EVERY single ruling they have made as "liberal"! I don't agree with many of the Court's rulings, but their ruling is their ruling. And, your assertion that the Congress has "coequal" rights, responsibilities and duties to define, implement and enforce the Constitution is from Mars!! Have you ever READ the Constitution??

The Founding Fathers were exceptionally bright men who created a government of 3 distinct branches precisely to AVOID a situation in which different branches could align with each other to gang up on another branch. Each branch is no more equal than another. The Congress creates law; the executive implements law and the Supreme Court interprets law to determine its compliance with the Constitution. There is NOTHING "coequal" in that!! Perhaps you are confusing judicial activism with "coequal" but, in his SCOTUS hearing, judge Robert Bork made the assertion that the Court offers rulings on MANY cases which should be referred back to the Congress because those cases have NO BASIS in existing law. IOW, the Court is exceeding its Constitutional authority by making a LOT of rulings such as Row v. Wade.

Congress can roll funny cigarettes, but that doesn't make them all cigars. Making many laws on citizenship does NOT overrule the 14th Amendment!! In order to overrule or amend the 14th Amendment, it takes a 2/3rds majority of the states to pass ANY such amendment and that simply hasn't happened!!

As for the rest of your comments, I would suggest that you bone up more on civics, starting with a good reading and comprehension of the Constitution. You clearly do not comprehend the makeup of our government and how it is SUPPOSED to work (versus how it actually works! We can discuss that later, you need to get the basics, first!).

Actually, you don't know much about the Constitution at all.

NOWHERE in the Constitution, does that document give full “SUPREME” power to the Supreme Court to determine Constitutional issues.

Congress can, by simple majority legislation, tell the Court that it is wrong, and then tell the Courts that they have no jurisdiction in the matter, anymore, in any case that would require any deviation from Congressional interpretation, to prevail.

Newt Gingrich agrees with me on this point. I suggest you go to Newt.org and educate yourself.

Congress is COEQUAL, and not subordinate to the Courts.

Newt.org

I suggest EVERYONE visit Newt’s website, as very few people seem to understand Newt’s points about the Courts.

Newt’s plan to rein in the Courts is wonderful.

The COURT gave ITSELF “Supreme” power. The Constitution NEVER gave the Court such power.

http://www.newt.org/solutions/protecting-life-and-religious-liberty

Click on the links, on this page.

Newt has a long, 54 page plan to put the Courts back in their place!

Judicial Supremacy is a very liberal idea, and we need to fight back.

Birtherism is, in many ways, a very liberal idea in its strategy and design. Congress DOES have much more power than the Birthers understand.

Also, the first attorney involved in Birther issues was a Hillary Clinton DEMOCRAT!