> “Even if we pass some of the great amendments suggested, why would SCOTUS not just “interpret” them to mean something that they don’t? “
The example 28th Amendment of this thread is a game changer and is like no other amendment that has ever existed.
The answer to your fear is in Section 3 where the States are allowed to void any specific Supreme Court ruling. The term ‘void’ in legal definitions means to be treated as if it never existed.
SCOTUS won’t have any interpretation opportunity for Amendment 28 Section 3. If 30 or more states declare according to Amendment 28 that the same-sex ruling of today is void, the state statutes and policies are free to remain intact and there is nothing the federal government can do about it. No reliance is placed on any part of federal government to interpret or enforce. All power from the example 28 falls to the States. That’s why it’s like nothing seen before; why it’s a game changer.
Rulers who do not adhere to the Rule of Law are not going to be restrained by whatever the states and the people vote upon as the rule of law, no matter what Amendments are added. We have seen this time and again.
The Lawless will not regard the lawful or the law. They will creatively find justifications and loopholes to disregard and nullify the law, not to mention outright sabotage before a prevailing Amendment can be ratified.
Tyrants do not and will not abide by any Amendments that make it through a ratification process unmolested. Not without the threat and show of force.
Not to mention Conservatives are rapidly a growing minority in America as we are actively being REPLACED by foreign squatters at the behest of the ruling class of both parties upon whom will be given ‘voting rights’ in short order.
Let me pose this question - given the dreadful ignorance of most of our electorate today, what is to prevent the Supreme Court, or the President - from making a pronouncement that this new “Amendment 28” is unconstitutional and invalid? You said Amendment 28 prevents that - but I still have a big concern.
Now you and I and anyone with half a brain can see you cannot wholesale just say an Amendment is unconstitutional - that is like saying up is down or black is white. But I believe they will effectively try to do that but using some other sort of high faluting legalize language and “interpreting” it in some way that it doesn’t really mean (they would find some emanation in the penumbra that revealed the inner mystical meaning which would be exactly what the federal elite powers that be want and exactly the opposite of what the constitutionalist writers intended...)
- just like they are doing to so many other amendments these last 40 years.(The constitution means whatever the judges say it means http://hubpages.com/hub/Hughes-Hubris )
Example - Article 10 has no “teeth” or is even much more than a placeholder these days.
My question - will Amendment 28 include in it actual enforcement measures - like clearly enumerate that the individual STATES reserve the right to direct state officials, state militias, etc to ENFORCE this by certain means, up to and including physically remove federal judges who try to circumvent this restriction of their power? I think this circular thing where the federal government makes, interprets and EXECUTES the federal law - and states have no specific power to enforce anything - is a real issue and something that will need to be addressed, otherwise Article V amendments can just be ‘reinterpreted’ and essentially ignored or downgraded as have so many others. And also we will have the media, the 5th column, ENDLESSLY propagandizing this whole thing so that uninformed people do not understand what is going on.
I am not a lawyer and probably have not stated this concern very clearly, - but I think it’s a key, core issue.
I do agree Article V may be the last possible measure other 3 other possible outcomes: wholesale revival in which peoples hearts are changed, total tyranny in which the whole country comes under totalitarian control, or all out bloody civil war.
To: boxlunch
> Hostage:
The example 28th Amendment of this thread is a game changer and is like no other amendment that has ever existed.
The answer to your fear is in Section 3 where the States are allowed to void any specific Supreme Court ruling. The term ‘void’ in legal definitions means to be treated as if it never existed.
SCOTUS won’t have any interpretation opportunity for Amendment 28 Section 3. If 30 or more states declare according to Amendment 28 that the same-sex ruling of today is void, the state statutes and policies are free to remain intact and there is nothing the federal government can do about it. No reliance is placed on any part of federal government to interpret or enforce. All power from the example 28 falls to the States. That’s why it’s like nothing seen before; why it’s a game changer