Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: opentalk

The Supreme Court is supposed to have a say in which pieces of legislation are unconstitutional. I would suggest that the fight should not be in the Legislative branch, but in the Judicial branch.


4 posted on 11/16/2009 7:16:33 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Play the Race Card -- lose the game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: ClearCase_guy
The Supreme Court is supposed to have a say in which pieces of legislation are unconstitutional. I would suggest that the fight should not be in the Legislative branch, but in the Judicial branch.

Like the partial repeal of the First Amendment via "McCain-Feingold"?

I wouldn't put a whole lot of eggs in that basket.

5 posted on 11/16/2009 7:28:45 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy

Has our civics training really sunk this low in this country? I still can’t believe I read posts like yours daily on FR. The House of Reps is EXACTLY where these debates are supposed to take place. The Supreme Court is tyranny under your assertion (don’t believe me? Read the Federalist Papers on the subject). Our Founders understood that principle. However, we’ve gotten so used to the left’s propaganda, even conservatives see the Court as above us all telling us right from wrong! No. We are the masters of our government through our elected representatives... we tell them what is right and what is wrong.


9 posted on 11/16/2009 7:33:27 AM PST by pgyanke (You have no "rights" that require an involuntary burden on another person. Period. - MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: ClearCase_guy
I would suggest that the fight should not be in the Legislative branch, but in the Judicial branch.

Unfortunately, that fight can't begin until the legislation is signed into law, and its operation has begun to the point where it generates a grievance that can be litigated.

Once that happens, the prospects for regaining and preserving our liberty become less likely by orders of magnitude.

Look at McCain-Feingold, a blatent violation of constitutionally protected free speech.

Bush should have vetoed it on the grounds that it was unconstitutional, but took the position that he would just sign it and then let the Supreme Court declare it so.

Well, the Supreme Court didn't declare it so. And so now it is law.

The fight over the constitutionality of health care, or ANY other law, needs to begin in the legislature.

14 posted on 11/16/2009 8:27:35 AM PST by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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