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

To: bjs1779
But according to #81 they shouldn't have

The theory, neither of the British, nor the State constitutions, authorizes the revisal of a judicial sentence by a legislative act. Nor is there any thing in the proposed Constitution, more than in either of them, by which it is forbidden. In the former, as well as in the latter, the impropriety of the thing, on the general principles of law and reason, is the sole obstacle. A legislature, without exceeding its province, cannot reverse a determination once made in a particular case; though it may prescribe a new rule for future cases. This is the principle, and it applies in all its consequences, exactly in the same manner and extent, to the State governments, as to the national government now under consideration.

They were in effect trying to reverse a determination once made in a particular case. Now if Florida does right by its citizens, the state legislature will pass a law preventing this from happening again.

777 posted on 07/07/2005 8:34:09 PM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 776 | View Replies ]


To: billbears
But according to #81 they shouldn't have

Please clarify. You stated they should of passed a bill. They did. Now you change the subject?

780 posted on 07/07/2005 8:39:40 PM PDT by bjs1779 ("I don’t want anyone trying to feed that GIRL" Greer thundered from the bench in 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 777 | 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