Posted on 02/14/2016 7:00:08 AM PST by Enlightened1
The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia doesn't merely mark a tragedy for Constitutional philosophy - it may mark the death of American Constitutionalism as a whole.
Scalia's philosophy of jurisprudence is well-known and shaped two generations of conservative thinkers: the Constitution ought to be interpreted according to its original meaning. This shouldn't have been a groundbreaking notion given that most legislation is interpreted according to those rules, but because leftist jurists have spent a century chiseling away at the meaning of the Constitution based on their personal political beliefs, Scalia's reinvigoration of traditional interpretive methodologies made him a historic figure. Scalia's brilliant, passionate writing style made him author of some of the most famous dissents in Supreme Court history, and channeled the modern conservative frustration with the continuing abandonment of the Constitution.
Scalia's jurisprudence also reminded conservatives that there is no substitute for proven Constitutional originalism. Most conservatives ignored that when they greenlit the appointment of cipher John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, a point I made when he was appointed. But Scalia provided a consistent reminder that Constitutional philosophy matters. It isn't just a game of doing whatever you want politically. Constitutional jurisprudence is about recognizing the limits of the federal government - and recognizing the limits of the politicization of the Court itself.
In the end, Scalia's death could mark the end of the Constitution itself. That's because the current Supreme Court rested, until Scalia's death, on the vague, confused, indeterminate philosophy of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who apparently decides cases on the basis of whether he has a solid bowel movement that morning. That means that half the time, the Constitution has a shot, as in Citizens United; the other half of the time...
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Listen. If any of that comes to pass, I will be in open rebellion.
“After law school, Cruz worked as a law clerk for several judges, including Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist from 1996 to 1997.”
““After law school, Cruz worked as a law clerk for several judges, including Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist from 1996 to 1997.—
So, you would think he would know that he is not a Natural Born Citizen. I know that, and I’ve never clerked for anyone.
In the end if a law(including but not limited to a Constitutional law) is interpreted in any way other than the way it was by the writers when passed/ratified. It is not a law but a judgement of men in black robes, indeed you can’t even call that a legitimate interpenetration.
The whole point of rule of law is so that men sitting in the court and its appointing executive office can’t simply make up the law as they go. The idea of a ‘living’ constitution as they euphemistically call it is the idea of the rule of men who’s judgement and standards change case by case by their personal values and assessment of the ‘times’ and people before them thus also the nature of the law without any laborious act of the legislator or for that matter constitutional limitation changes in each case. Invariably according to their desires.
Its like you deliberately ignoring what your boss told you to do and going off and doing your own thing which you claim is tangentially related to your boss’s orders.
You will get fired as your boss will see you hijacking the business and sabotaging its common goals. Yet that is precisely what today’s ‘court’ does with regard to our Constitution.
It is not obedience to law of the people, nor is it good behavior by the so called employees of the people. Just as it is not rule of law, but rule of dishonorable men with their own agenda and no accountability.
To that end we as conservatives should see injustices like John Roberts and Kennedy just like we see injustices like Kagen and Ginsburg. As Oligarchs/dictators, not men or women of law. To that end if we must choose between them the question is really what dictator you would prefer to live under Roberts vs Kagen.
We of course agree that idealy we should like the rule of law and republican democracy but that is not always obtainable
Good for you. Don't vote for a Constitutional Conservative, if that is your choice.
This CC knows otherwise, and will vote for the CC.
How nice was the timing that the most conservative judge dies just before fairy boy leaves office.
How he must be having a party right now
stop blaming the pubs and some of you look in the dang mirror....
Americans do not care one way or the other...just give them their lattes and their cell phones that can do all these fancy things and they are as fat and happy as clams...
the people will not wake up...
key word is "faithful" because if we can't count on those 30% voting on the selected candidate than its all a moot point...and we couldn't count on people last big election...they were pouting...
There is no end to the Constitution.
I have an iPhone and consume numerous Americanos daily.
Okay, it’s not the cellphones and drinks... but I agree modern conveniences are masking the severity of the threats stalking our liberties.
You say the people will not wake up. Do you not see the energy Cruz and Trump are generating?
So it is pointless to argue this with you. But I’ll make a deal with you. If in a year from today we don’t have a new president sat in the whitehouse I’ll come on here and post about how wrong I was.
I can only hope the conspiracy theorists would do the same if that isn’t how it goes down.
The Constitution?
When did Der Trumpenflipper's business history -- festooned with a Who's Who of post-modern organized criminals -- ever make it self evident he'd give a hoot about something so trivial as the Lawful framework for constituting how the Republic was intended to do bidness?
Editor's Note, 8/10/15: Four years ago, Wayne Barett reported shady business deals ahead of Trump's flirtation with a White House run. After first exposing Trump’s ties to organized crime in his 1992 book, Barrett looked into his most recent business dealings and discovered the following:
* One associate who was an "unindicted co-conspirator" in a massive 2000 stock swindleâ€â€Âand escaped prison only by helping to convict 19 others, including six members of New York crime families
* Two associates who served prison time on cocaine charges
* Another partner prosecuted for trafficking underage girls after a dramatic helicopter raid on a yacht off the Turkish coast
* A pending lawsuit against Trump Soho that alleges daughter Ivanka, among others, made fraudulent misrepresentations
Just fog Ed about dat.
Bump that.
Agreed. When they opposed the Constitution by making the state the PROHIBITOR of free exercise of religion (Christianity) in the late 50's and early 60's, that was the catalyst which snowballed into full-blown fascism. Striking down state contraception laws was next, followed quickly by mandating abortion nationwide.
The fact that they barely squeaked by a correct decision in Dale v. Boy Scouts was an indicated that there was a cancer deep within this body.
I love the things we talk about because of Trump. I believe he could shake thing up and I like the idea of a business man looking at the numbers HOWEVER...
I never hear him talking about the Constitution. How do you know that he will choose a Constitutional justice? I heard him say.. he wants a justice LIKE Scalia but not HOW he would pick him.
I hear no plans just that things will happen and it reminds me of "hope and change" that can mean anything to everyone. What they want to hear but not want he means and plans. Do you hear that? or do you hear better plans than I do?
FRiend: Did you ever think that a president would use the power of his office to facilitate a deal with the Iranian regime that enables them to gain nuclear power status and, at the same time, grant them $150 billion dollars that they will surely use to promote terrorism and wreak havoc in the world? I don’t even know of any conspiracy theorists who would have envisioned something as wicked and inimical to our national interests as this “deal”.
The point is — the unthinkable does happen. I trust you would admit to that reality.
Maybe we will be lucky and he just moves on to continue his destruction of America through his “good offices” in another position of political influence (e.g., the United Nations).
From Obama’s viewpoint and past experience, it wouldn’t surprise me if he decided to stick around under false pretenses and work on his “unfinished business”. The American public is gullible and the Republican congress certainly would not stop him. I don’t see much strength and resolve in America these days.
In what way does Trump oppose Communism?
Forgive me for revisiting our discussion, but another example of ‘the unthinkable’ occurring just happened yesterday: Obama announced his trip to communist Cuba. After his catastrophic Iranian “deal” one can only wonder what concessions he has in mind for his newfound Cuban “compatriots”.
Again, it would have been a stretch for even conspiracy theorists to predict seven years ago that an American president would legitimize the exact same dictatorial and ruthless regime that once allowed the emplacement of nuclear missiles aimed directly at our country. Fidel Castro was and still is an enemy of the United States.
Again, my point is that I would not be surprised by anything that Obama does. If anything, the “conspiracy theorists” have consistently underestimated him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.