Constitution Killers

The American Spectator ^ | 3-3-05 | By George Neumayr

[Finalapproach29er]

Ignorance (and apathy) is killing this country.

[thoughtomator]

If the SCOTUS can't abide by the Constitution then on what basis do they claim to rule?

[goldstategop]

The Living Constitution - As Updated By Liberals.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Jim Noble]

The appropriate constitutional response to judicial "interpretations" like Roper is to pass a Bill of Attainder against the justices.

Article I, section 9 forbids this.

Besides, a Congress which refuses its Article III, section 2 duty to regulate and make exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court by simple majority is hardly going to start impeaching Associate Justices by 2/3.

That having been said, the power asserted by the Court in Kennedy's opinion is revolutionary, on a scale with Margaret Marshall's opinion in the Mass gay "marriage" case.

I do believe that eventually, force will be met with force-but it won't be Congress which delivers the response.

[Jim Noble]

The States need to ignore these idiots and just continue to march

Yes, it's a teachable moment, if only some Governor would sign a warrant of execution for one of the "children" spared by yesterday's pretended decision.

[goldstategop]

I'd like to see that happen. If the SCOTUS issues an unconstitutional decision, the executive doesn't need to obey it. I like President Lincoln's response to Chief Justice Taney: "He issued a decision? Let him enforce it."

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Jim Noble]

Really, it would be great if the President and Congress were to pick one of these crazy decisions and publically declare it to be beyond the Constitutional authority of the Court and simply refuse to enforce it

You're on the right track.

But this case and this "decision" don't involve the President, or Congress (yet).

The Constitutionally correct thing to do is for the executive of one of the impacted States to issue a warrant of execution for one of the "children" covered by this decision, and then to see that it is carried out. If two or more States would act in concert, it would be better.

I agree that all USSC "decisions" which are without warrant in the Constitution are void, but if the People do not treat them as such, they will continue to metastasize throughout the body politic.

It is obviously illegitimate for this Court, or any court, to cite public opinion or emerging public consensus as the basis for rulings, when the public has a legitimate and fully functioning mechanism (electing representatives) for expressing such opinions and forming such consensus.

[goldstategop]

An act repugnant to the letter and spirit of the Constitution is void irrespective of the issuing authority. I find no warrant in the Constitution for the banning of capital punishment, especially on the arbitrary criteria of age. The SCOTUS could not cite a single constitutional provision for its edict. It cited an unratified treaty - but ignored the fact UNRATIFIED treaties are NOT the law of the land and brushed aside the fact the U.S government had specifically submitted a reservation allowing for the execution of juvenile capital offenders. If the Court chooses to ignore the Constitution, no else is required to pay heed to its rulings.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[kittymyrib]

The Supreme Court is now unconstitutional. It is a collection of 9 unelected dictators who tell the country what they want the rest of us to follow. They don't obey our laws, but cite the laws of other countries. This is not the way our founders perceived the Court. It needs to be reformed or abolished.

[Leatherneck_MT]

This is not the way our founders perceived the Court. It needs to be reformed or abolished.

I'd prefer to see the 5 majority decision makers hung for treason before it is abolished

I think the rest of the Federal Judges in this country would wake up and smell the coffee.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

EXCELLENT FIND. Thanks for posting. Legal Outrage = Ammo for the Culture War!

[wita]

Now there is a rhetorical question if I ever read one.

[wita]

I'd prefer...

Could we maybe start with a few people who call themselves senator?

[Leatherneck_MT]

Could we maybe start with a few people who call themselves senator?

Works for me

[NCSteve]

Apathy being the key word here. There will be a lot of huffing and puffing online and in the media among conservative pundits, but in the end, nothing will happen. As many have suggested, the death penalty will be declared unusable by this court before too long. That too will meet with overwhelming apathy and we will have slipped quietly into an oligarchy.

[hope]

"Really, it would be great if the President and Congress were to pick one of these crazy decisions and publically declare it to be beyond the Constitutional authority of the Court and simply refuse to enforce it, and in the process shatter forever the notion that the Sup Court can serve as a superlegislature that orders the other branches around."

I beleive Congress has the power to ask that the Supreme not rule on certain un-constitutional items....But, that would require a Republican with some backbone.

[Jim Noble]

I beleive Congress has the power to ask that the Supreme not rule on certain un-constitutional items....

Congress does not have the power to ask.

Congress has the power to command.

Article III, section 2: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make"

[wita]

Works for me

Somehow I knew it would.