Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NCSteve
See this link (among many for a discussion of judicial review):
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/judicialrev.htm

I have no idea what this person's position on the issue is I just cite it as an example that this is a well discussed area.

If judicial review was a bad idea, the congress has had 200 years to change it. So I think theoretical discussions about the intent of the constitution have become somewhat overtaken by events.
96 posted on 03/03/2005 10:40:33 AM PST by rdf2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: rdf2
If judicial review was a bad idea, the congress has had 200 years to change it.

Until the Civil War, judicial review fell well within the perceived constraints declared by Alexander Hamilton. There was a balance of power. After Lincoln demonstrated that the Federal government (and its military might) made Hamilton's assertions on judicial power a pipe dream, the court has been used to political end ever since. Only recently has the court become so arrogant as to assert its own will and to effectively legislate from the bench.

As Jefferson astutely observed:

"The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body — working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated."

98 posted on 03/03/2005 10:49:27 AM PST by NCSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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