saveliberty
Diamond Member
- Oct 12, 2009
- 58,692
- 10,748
- 2,030
The First Amendment
Vague poster is vague.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The First Amendment
Name one right that is not subject to law.
It is not helpful to attempt to divine the original intent of the framers of our Constitution in every context; nor illuminating to read it by candlelight. Americans have always been a forward-looking people and not anachronistic in our views. (We no longer go about our lives in powdered wigs and small clothes.) I think it must be admitted that the Constitution is a "living document," as evident by the fact that it has been amended twenty-seven times since its adoption by the several states; which is a testament to the wisdom and foresight of the framers in making provision for such future changes. Surely, they could not have intended that we be ruled by their dead hands.
Times have changed. Democracy in America has come a long way from its early beginnings following our struggle for independence. The America Alexis de Tocqueville described in the 1830's, which was largely an agrarian society, was eclipsed by the rise of the nation as an industrial power in the latter half of the Nineteenth Century to become the great economic and military power of the Twentieth Century; and with such changes came the inevitable expansion of the nature and power of government, and the laws that govern our society. Our "founding fathers" could only be utterly astonished at the America of today. But what would comfort them most, notwithstanding the recent efforts of certain groups to rewrite our history, is that we are still a nation of laws and not men.
1. "It is not helpful to attempt to divine the original intent of the framers of our Constitution in every context; nor illuminating to read it by candlelight."
Progressive propaganda.
Judge Bork makes the point that Originalists can easily apply timeless constitutional commands to new technologies, such as wiretapping and television, and to changed circumstances, as suits for libel and slander.
All the judge needs is knowledge of the core value that the Framers intended to protect. And, while we may not decide every case in the way the Framers would have, entire ranges of problems will be placed off limits to judges, thus preserving democracy in those areas where the framers intended democratic government.
2. "...Americans have always been a forward-looking people and not anachronistic...."
Justice Brennan falls back on the idea that moderns should not be bound by a world that is dead and gone.
Of course, there are lots of laws on the books today by folks dead and gone: Social Security laws, or the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or the Sixteenth Amendment imposing an income tax, and all nine justices who participated in Roe v. Wade are now dead.
Would you, Brennan, or the rest of the Progressives, suggest ignoring any of these .or does he simply wish to allow judges to pick and choose which laws written by dead people we are to be bound by?
No, this transformative view is simply designed to allow justices to erase parts of the Constitution.
That is an assumption. To say that one has rights retained under the Ninth Amendment (petitio principii begs the question) assumes the existence of such rights in the first instance. Under the Constitution, rights exist only by law.
No. You are not born with any rights. All rights exist by law, and the law alone. There are no rights without law; no rights contrary to law; no rights superior to law. That is the way it is under the Constitution. We live under the "rule of law".
Yes, I have read the Constitution - many, many times. I carry a pocket copy with me, and its well-thumbed pages can attest to my devoted reading.
I learned constitutional law from Laurence Tribe, who is the foremost exponent on the subject; his treatise American Constitutional Law 3d is the standard reference. I once asked Professor Tribe a question relating to constitutional interpretation, to which he answered: "The Constitution does not mean what it says." I thought he was jesting at the time; but after over 40 years of reading Supreme Court reports, I have come to think that he meant what he said.
That is, in part, correct. The United States is not a direct democracy, it is a constitutional republic. U.S. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 4. It is a representative form of government, albeit there is now provision for initiatives to be enacted into law directly by public referendum, e.g., Proposition 8 initiative in California for an anti-gay marriage amendment to the State constitution that was ruled unconstitutional. Perry v. Schwartzenegger, 704 F.Supp.2d (ND Cal. 2010). However, the power of the judiciary is not just separate and coequal, but independent in its authority to interpret the Constitution. Unto this last, you can rest assured that the Supreme Court will not be overturning Marbury v. Madison anytime soon.
Constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law School professor and former mentor to President Barack Obama, said the president obviously misspoke earlier this week when he made comments about the Supreme Court possibly overturning the health-care law.
Mr. Tribe, who calls the president one of his best students, said in an interview: He didnt say what he meant and having said that, in order to avoid misleading anyone, he had to clarify it.
Mr. Tribe said he saw no reason for the president to express his views on the matter, because everyone already knows he wants the case upheld.
I dont think anything was gained by his making these comments and I dont think any harm was done, Mr. Tribe said, except by public confusion.
The dust-up began Monday, when Mr. Obama was asked about the law and said it would be a prime example of judicial overreach if the Supreme Court ruled against it. Im confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress, he said
Laurence Tribe: Obama Misspoke on Supreme Court - Washington Wire - WSJ