The Federal apparatus, including SCOUS, is unbalanced and out of control. You, through your great oratory and persuasive skill may get a law passed to "protect the unborn" (like the 18th Amendment with alcohol). Then, the winds of public opinion change and we have another law passed to reverse the former unanimously passed law (like the 21st Amendment). This example far exceeds anything related to the normal legislative process. It was a Constitutional Amendment for crying out loud!
There are numerous constitutional anomolies from SCOTUS that distort the original intent (Roe v Wade, Kelo v New London, Lawrence v Texas, Obamacare, Wickard v Fillburn) and your great and mighty statism did nothing to prevent their implementation. In fact, federal statism enabled them.
Maybe, just maybe, the approach you are peddling isn't the proper direction....? Maybe, a VERY STRICT inprepretation of the constitution would set us back on the course our founding fathers intended.
“Maybe, a VERY STRICT inprepretation of the constitution would set us back on the course our founding fathers intended.”
HELL YEA!!!
Only problem is, the courts already interpret the Constitution. Heck, laws supposedly can’t be passed that are Unconstitutional. Supposedly....
“The Federal apparatus, including SCOTUS, is unbalanced and out of control.”
Yes, but that doesn’t change what is it’s constitutional role. Should the states be responsible for their own defense or is that part of the federal government? Again, we don’t uphold the constitution by violating it whenever we feel it will provide us with momentary advantages.
“There are numerous constitutional anomolies from SCOTUS that distort the original intent (Roe v Wade, Kelo v New London, Lawrence v Texas, Obamacare, Wickard v Fillburn) and your great and mighty statism did nothing to prevent their implementation. In fact, federal statism enabled them.”
Indeed - but what gain do you seek by arguing that a child is a child in North Dakota and not a child when they cross the state line. It is absurd. It was absurd when the line was the 34th parallel, and it will be absurd now.
Again, this is the Kansas-Nebraska act - the “Great compromise” that was to resolve the issue of slavery. We know how that worked out - it was a disaster.
Per the 14th, this is the authority of the federal government and it is in it’s purview.
“Maybe, a VERY STRICT inprepretation of the constitution would set us back on the course our founding fathers intended.”
And where does the constitution say that personhood is a state issue? It does not. The constitution is on my side, not yours.