Tag Archives: U.S. Constitution

To Err is Human; No Such Privilege Should be Afforded the Courts!

Boundaries, whether in the form of a moral code, a code of covenant/conduct and yes, even Laws, are created to refine, restrict or openly bar certain functions in an attempt to create some measure of survivable order.

While Laws are created to either censure, restrict or outright prohibit certain actions, we must never forget that the Law must never be allowed to restrict or ever dare approach interfering with or even professing the authority to grant a right which is inalienable to you by the mere fact that you are you. These rights are implicit and are never to be explicitly cataloged or confined as it is your domain,restricted only by adverse effects your actions have on another and/or their ability to express their own (rights). The Courts, by the way, have no such privileges, but are bound to the strict and ridged rules of order and jurisdiction.

Posted in Poli-Philos | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Ginsburg Comments Model Senior Courts Schism

Ms. Ginsburg’s position regarding the U.S. Constitution is well chronicled; in summary she posits the U.S. Constitution as grossly inadequate in depth and scope and far too deferential with respect to “sovereign rights” of the Individual (vis a vis the “Bill of Rights”). As to the communion of States the 10th Amendment is a far too restrictive covenant for a Justice who consistently articulates a view decidedly more meddlesome, liberal intimating an expansive domain where governance may more freely roam.

Posted in Poli-Philos | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Justice Scalia; Would He Challenge Senate Majority Leader McConnell?

For most Americans Justice Scalia was an unknown which says much more about the publics lack of reverence for the Constitution than it says about his advocacy. He remains a permanent fixture in the matrix of appropriate juris prudence where the ideal is that despite one’s personal agenda you side with the law and not bend it to suit a temporary indulgence or do you re-write it by unilateral dictate. He recently wrote; “The strikingly unrepresentative character of the body voting on today’s …would be irrelevant if they were functioning  as judges”. Later, in his dissenting view on the issue of Gay Marriage, he wrote “To allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation; no social transformation without representation.”

Posted in Poli-Philos | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment