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

To: justshutupandtakeit
I would like to make a few remarks about "judicial review."

There is nothing wrong with the Supreme Court ruling that this or that law exceeds Constitutional bounds (as it did during the early days of the New Deal). The problem is the Bill of Rights, which Hamilton opposed. What was intended to be a list of things the Federal government could not do inevitably mutated into positive grants of rights by the government which naturally means the government has the right to enforce them. In other words, "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion" naturally eventually became a grant of power to the Federal government to outlaw school prayers and forbid high school principals to edit the "f"-word out of student newspapers (the Fourteenth Amendment, which is often blamed for this phenomenon, merely speeded the process along). The Bill of Rights converted then US Constitution from a simple rulebook for the Federal government into a work of political philosophy.

This is not Hamilton's reason for opposing the BoR (and since he was an avowed loose constructionist, his own reason seems a bit specious), but I believe it is sound. I also believe it is silly to try to undo every disastrous Supreme Court ruling by means of a Constitutional Amendment. Simply removing the Bill of Rights might solve the problem, or perhaps amending the Fourteenth Amendment to make clear it applied only to the treatment of the Freedmen of the Reconstruction era. Other than that the Congress has the authority to abolish each and every single federal court other than the SCOTUS, and it could even limit SCOTUS to hearing only the cases the Constitution originally referred to it.

80 posted on 08/07/2006 10:08:58 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (HaGedolim tzerikhim limshol--`AKHSHAYV!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: Zionist Conspirator

Hamilton and Madison both opposed the Bill of Rights and both made arguments similiar to yours. But political expediency led to its being proposed and included. There was no applicability to the states so the damage was limited until the Fourteenth amendment applied them to the states.


83 posted on 08/07/2006 10:33:34 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

To: Zionist Conspirator
"-- removing the Bill of Rights might solve the problem --"

You want to allow gov't to infringe upon your rights to life, liberty or property?

How but we insist the BOR's is honored by all levels of gov't, -- rather than being ignored?

87 posted on 08/07/2006 11:10:01 AM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | 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