The clear words of our constitution speak to every man.
A USSC decision, if repugnant to constitutional principles, is void.
IE, the USSC cannot make a prohibition of 'assault weapons' constitutional. Their opinion would be flawed by the logic of the 2nd amendment.
We the people have the right, ~and the duty~, to fight such infringments.
Why ~you~ would ignore such infringements is best addressed by your mental health specialist.
664 -tpaine-
justshutupandtakeit wrote:
A USSC decision is NEVER "null and void" until another USSC decision says so. What IS "null and void" is your opinion of a Court decision.
--Read the below, and weep for your obstinate ignorance:
"Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
The rule must be discharged."
Source: 1 Cranch 137 (1803
Justice Marshall
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Address:
http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/9.htm Changed:9:33 AM on Monday, November 24, 2003
You probably are quoting about the only opinion of Marshall's which you can agree with. Most of those opposed to Bush, modernity and national progress hate him, too.
Generally the claim is that Marshall's Court was "aristocratic" or "sappers" or other equally absurd quotes from Jeffersonians.