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

To: OneWingedShark

Okay, I see what you’re saying. Cases concerning ambassadors and such and ones which states are a party to are the only kinds Congress can’t touch. But there’s another way around this. Some people think, and I tend to agree, that due process requires judicial review.


65 posted on 11/06/2012 11:24:05 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]


To: Tublecane
Okay, I see what you’re saying. Cases concerning ambassadors and such and ones which states are a party to are the only kinds Congress can’t touch. But there’s another way around this. Some people think, and I tend to agree, that due process requires judicial review.

More detailed, but I think there's some records/debates concerning the Constitution [and its ratification?] dealing w/ Judicial Review: essentially it was considered but rejected. {Strict Constitutionalism doesn't allow it... of course many 'conservatives' would balk at strict Constitutionalism.}

77 posted on 11/06/2012 11:48:37 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | 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