Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Shepherds_Hook_47, Feb 7, 2013.
For example, sir?
if someone read the Declaration today for the first time, it wouldn't be a stretch to think that it was written last week.
I've got a pocket copy from the heritage foundation in my briefcase. Figure if I ever get arrested for doing something stupid, it'll be appropriate reading material....
I just finished a Government class in college last semester; read and studied them all.
Oh, completely agreed. Not a fan of activist judging.
Balancing the Federal commerce power with the unenumerated rights being given to the states in the 10th Amendment. The jurisprudence in milestone cases like International Shoe had to develop tests like minimum contacts to determine when a state's commerce has enough interstate effect to be Congressionally-regulated commerce.
The Constitution's plain language does not lay out a threshold, Analysis of legislative purpose and history along with parsing the Constitutional language was necessary.
Also, the Erie doctrine, that applies state substantive law in cases that lie in federal diversity jurisdiction. Completely logical and not very controversial anymore, but not in the plain language.
There are many, many more examples of Constitutional plain language not providing specific enough information to resolve disputes. Those were just two I had time to fire off on my phone
Again, I am a big believer in a total plain language analysis where possible, and that allows the Constitution to resolve a lot of disputes (speech includes Internet speech AND printing presses, arms include muskets AND AR-15s, etc). But sometimes issues are too factually complex for the document to address without any analysis.
Took a class in Consitutional Government as a junior in college and studied the federalist papers among other constituional type documents, but that was years ago.
Rarely ever read it unless someone posts an amendment or wording from the BOR on a forum.
What's the name of that app?
Constitution for iPhone and iPod Touch V.1.5.1: © Copyright 2012 Clint Bagwell Consulting
I was using Google to do some research - I ended up on a Cato Institute web site.
About 2 weeks later I got a Declaration of Independence & Constitution handbook from them in the mail.
I did not leave my name or address on the web site.
Spooky coincidence or they have an amazing ability to use the internet.
Have read both several times since getting the handbook.
They are sitting right here, on my desk. I keep a copy in my car too.
All the Best,
I'm not a Conlaw expert, but I am a lawyer and -- not boasting, just for context here -- a pretty accomplished one. Top of my class, adjunct professor, etc.
When discussions of the Constitution come up I am regularly told, by folks who may be VERY accomplished in other fields but have no legal training at all, that this or that or the other thing is "what the Constitution says." When I mention the Supreme Court, these folks regularly give me some version of "so what?"
The Constitution doesn't belong to lawyers and judges -- God no. But this idea that you don't benefit from SOME kind of education in understanding its meaning and function -- or, worse, the idea that having that learning or experience is a DETRIMENT to such understanding -- that's not a useful notion.
CF, I agree no JD is strictly required. But some study and learning is. Agreed?
Too many folks wave the thing around like a talisman, and even if they have actually read it, don't understand it or try to.
To coin a phrase: I rest my case.
Do us a favor and coin Judicial Review as a power granted by the COTUS and not a power granted by the SCOTUS and rest against that.
Or just keep supporting legislation from the bench by default. Maybe we can get other branches of government to grant themselves powers not dictated by the COTUS...
All three branches have repeatedly done exactly that. This country is a LOT more complex than it once was, Where in the Constitution does it say how to regulate e-commerce? Or outline the proper judicial system for the military? Or put in place a system that regulates food and medicine, keeping rat feces and toxic faux-medicines out of stores as much as possible? Etc. etc.
Requiring nothing but the text without educated analysis would make the nation literally unmanageable.
Here we have the problem. We don't play by the rules anymore.
E-Commerce can be directly dealt with in the same manner as ordinary commerce. The only thing that changes is the ordering process.
The proper outline for the UCMJ is found in the COTUS. "The Congress shall have Power... To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces" Of course it specifies Navy because we aren't suppose to support a standing Army for more than two years.
Creating the FDA is NOT a power of the federal government and therefor is left to the States to form and fund. What did we do before the 1906?
The nation is more easily managed at the local level. It's when we put our full faith and trust in a central government dictated by people that don't have context of the situation and then choose to violate the basis of our law that we run into the real problems.