Role of the Court

[Pah]

The function of the legislature is primary, its exercise fortified by presumptions of right and legality, and is not to be interfered with lightly, nor by any judicial conception of its wisdom or propriety. They have no limitation, we repeat, but constitutional ones, and what those are the judiciary must judge

A quote from the holding of Weems v US, 217 U.S. 349.

Is there any doubt that the court does not legislate but is confined to evaluate constitutionality and void those laws not meeting Constitutional Law?

 

[evearael]

The court is designed to evaluate laws and void any that are contrary to the constitution. It does not create new laws. The problem is whose interpretation of the constitution do you follow? Is it a living document, or is the meaning stagnant?

 

[Pah]

The court is designed to evaluate laws and void any that are contrary to the constitution. It does not create new laws. The problem is whose interpretation of the constitution do you follow? Is it a living document, or is the meaning stagnant?

I don't see how it can not be a living document. So many "evils" and injustices would prevail if it did not "live" - slavery being the prime example.

 

[michel]

I don't see how it can not be a living document. So many "evils" and injustices would prevail if it did not "live" - slavery being the prime example.

And surely it must be living, to cope with our ever changing life; there are new injustices every day, as a result of new discoveries.

 

[standing_alone]

s there any doubt that the court does not legislate but is confined to evaluate constitutionality and void those laws not meeting Constitutional Law?

Not for me there isn't.

 

[BUDDY]

I don't see how it can not be a living document. So many "evils" and injustices would prevail if it did not "live" - slavery being the prime example.

I believe that there was an ammendment to the constitution that ended slavery, coupled with efforts from the executive branch.

 

[Pah]

I believe that there was an ammendment to the constitution that ended slavery, coupled with efforts from the executive branch.

Exactly the point!

Slavery started off as 3/5 of a human being and ended up being full citizens.

 

[BUDDY]

Exactly the point!

Slavery started off as 3/5 of a human being and ended up being full citizens.

Yes, but where the law is concerned, slavery was ended because of an ammendment to the constitution, not because of the ruling of the Supreme Court.

 

[kevmicsmi]

I don't see how it can not be a living document. So many "evils" and injustices would prevail if it did not "live" - slavery being the prime example.

That is what the amendment process is for.

 

[kevmicsmi]

And surely it must be living, to cope with our ever changing life; there are new injustices every day, as a result of new discoveries.

that is what the amendment process is for

 

[Pah]

Yes, but where the law is concerned, slavery was ended because of an ammendment to the constitution, not because of the ruling of the Supreme Court.

And yet it took the Court nearly 100 years to actualize it into equality

 

[Pah]

That is what the amendment process is for.

It might be sufficient if the language of the amendment was not so broad. As it is, you always need the Court to say what it says.

 

[kevmicsmi]

And yet it took the Court nearly 100 years to actualize it into equality

Which would be an argument against broad interpretation of ammendments such as the 14th, not for broad interpretation.

 

[kevmicsmi]

It might be sufficient if the language of the amendment was not so broad. As it is, you always need the Court to say what it says.

Of course you need a court, but this is sill no excuse for looking at the constitution like a collidescope. If I turn it this way, i think I can make out an absolute right to privacy

 

[Pah]

Of course you need a court, but this is sill no excuse for looking at the constitution like a collidescope. If I turn it this way, i think I can make out an absolute right to privacy

First of all, I think the Court calls is a universal right. Second,

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

There is my right to privacy, I claim it and the Court agrees. I claim reproductive rights and the Court agrees. I claim inclusive marriage rights and my birth State Court agrees.

Any citizen, any class can do the same.

 

[opuntia]

Today there is tension between Congress and the Supreme Court over the issue of the First Amendment's Religion Clause. See the following:

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/freeexercise.htm

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:IUmqbdY3xskJ:ntweb11a.ais.msu.edu/luaoe/downloadables/publications/Policy_Briefs/religiouslanduse.pdf+RFRA+Congress&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4