Thanks for post.
It is simply amazing how tests invented by progressives on the Supreme Court have, over the years,replaced determining whether or not a specific law is in harmony with the documented intentions under which our Constitution was adopted. Whether or not a specific law is within the four corners of the Constitution and Congress’s delegated powers now takes a back seat to whether progressives on the court think the law is “rationally based“ or, “reasonable”, or whether the law has a “compelling state interest” which the Court may arbitrarily agree with and give it its blessing.
This is similar to the House of Lords which our founding fathers objected to when writing our Constitution. Under the English system there was no written constitution other than that which was in the minds of the House of Lords and it was subject to change at their mere whim and fancy. In addition, this is also similar to the Basic Law of Israel! After listing a number of rights which the people of Israel are supposedly entitled to, No.8 of the BASIC LAW OF ISRAELdeclares:
“There shall be no violation of rights under this Basic Law except by a law befitting the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose, and to an extent no greater than is required”
So, the rulers of Israel in their Basic Law have, just as our own Supreme Court has, usurped a power to ignore the people’s enumerated rights and also ignore defined and enumerated delegated powers by cleverly “interpreting” the laws to meet their own progressive and self interested purposes.
JWK
At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, `Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?' `A republic, if you can keep it,' responded Franklin.