[MozarkDawg]

I think his oath to uphold the Constitution can be interpreted 2 ways. It could mean, to uphold what the current law holds as constitutional, or it could mean, what he, himself believes to be constitutional. I really don't know.

The oath to uphold the Consititution means that he will go by WHAT IT SAYS. The Constitution says the Congress writes the bills, the presidents signs them into law. The AG is not specifically named in the Constitution as the one person in the land who will decide which laws, passed and unchallenged, shall be enforced and which shall not. It is not a violation of his oath to enforce all the laws passed and unchallenged, though he may personally think them unconstitutional, rather, IT IS HIS JOB.

We do not fix Congressional/presidential errors that way in this country.

[Texaggie79]

I think we fix legislative errors through our original jury system. If the jury finds the law that the defendant is being tried for to be unconstitutional, they would be doing a disservice to their fellow countrymen to convict that defendant of an unconstitutional law.