Skip to comments.
Ashcroft pledges to defend Brady law
CNN ^
| 5/31/02
Posted on 06/04/2002 10:08:51 AM PDT by pabianice
Edited on 04/29/2004 2:00:36 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 last
To: archy; ex con
All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.
Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
Can you help me out here? Maybe I misunderstand how this works. Does Ashcroft have the
discretion to pick and choose WHICH laws he wants to enforce and which laws he can
ignore? And if he does, can he effectively be protected from attacks by DIMocRATS
wrath against him and the GOP? (This is NOT sarcasm, btw).
I thought he told Congress that he would uphold the laws, even the ones he personally
did not agree with (which I thought was the job of the AG?)........
Comment #42 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson