Quote:
Originally Posted by Maruzo
I think maybe instead of conforming strictly to the original document like the author believe we should do, we can prehaps find some ways of laying down guidelines for the SCJ to follow. That guideline could be voted on by the American public.
|
Strict conformance to the Constitution is the only way to go. If we make things a guideline that's voted on then you end up with one group controlling a smaller group or a small vocal group with say support by the media and not by the population at large making rules, laws, changes that benefit them only and not the country as a whole.
The Constitution doesn't say what the government can do it says what they can't do. The Supreme Court is there (in watered down terms) to say this law is valid Constitutionally or not and to be the final arbiter when sides cannot agree. Over the years we as a country have somehow decided that it's ok to ride roughshod over peoples Rights if 51% think it's good or wanted.
NO Supreme Court Justice should flavor their decision with their political beliefs/values.
The answers are black and white...
Constitutional or not, follows the law as written NOT INTERPRETED and if a case from State XXXX says law #22 says something was illegal and a man was found guilty by his peers yet law #13 says he met requirements for doing the actions legally then the SC has the option of upholding the conviction by showing law #13 is unconstitutional or if both laws are Constitutional then the SC must find for the citizen and vacate the conviction since Rights belong to the People before the Rights of the state or the government.
I realize these are over simplifications but without writing a dissertation it was the best I could do at 0430.
Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk