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

To: Non-Sequitur
But that does not change the fact that the Supreme Court later determined that they were wrong in their belief that unilateral secession was legal.

Care to answer a simple question?

“Is the court supreme over the constitution, or the constitution supreme over the court?”

Your refusal to answer is really quite amusing. Our Friend Walt refuses to discuss the secession of the ratifying States from the union formed under the Articles of Confederation, and he refuses to discuss the high court’s response to the “palpably unconstitutional” Alien & Sedition Acts as well. You refuse to answer this simple question, and those John Taylor posed with it:

The word supreme is used twice in the constitution, once in reference to the superiority of the highest federal court over the inferior federal courts, and again in declaring "that the constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby." Did it mean to create two supremacies, one in the court, and another in the constitution? Are they colateral, or is one superior to the other? Is the court supreme over the constitution, or the constitution supreme over the court? Are "the judges in every state" to obey the articles of the union, or the construction of these articles by the supreme federal court?

Yes – quite amusing!

;>)

337 posted on 05/06/2002 3:04:05 PM PDT by Who is John Galt?
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies ]


To: Who is John Galt?
Quite the contrary, I responded here that I don't think my answer undermines the Constitution at all.
338 posted on 05/06/2002 3:29:11 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | 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