Here's the thing about nullification. My friend Russ Howard responded to an article I wrote last month by sending me this observation:
As ______________ recently pointed out to me, our side should stop using "nullified", nullify, nullification, etc, which is clearly a loser with the public, and start using phrases like "fair trial", "righting wrongs", acquitting, clearing, honoring the oath, obeying the highest law of the land, law enforcement, etc. E.g., "Jury Nullification" is a loser. "Fair Trial", use of discretion to right injustice, etc, are winners.Of course some would tell us that's not our place to decide -- and that if the composition of the Supreme Court can change enough to shift just one vote, well, turn 'em all in, Mr. and Mrs. America...
The Sheriff did not "nullify the law". The arrest / prosecution / statutory law would've nullified the Constitution. He obeyed and honored the highest law of the land, and prevented a lesser law or act from nullifying it. He did his job and obeyed The Law. Anything contrary isn't law and doesn't need to be "nullified". He was even preventing illegal activity, ending an illegal arrest, which is his job. Law enforcement.
2 comments:
The Supreme Court, and other courts of varying level in the hierarchy, have become the Priests of the Temple of Syrinx and have assumed control.
Frederick H Watkins said...
"The Supreme Court, and other courts of varying level in the hierarchy, have become the Priests of the Temple of Syrinx and have assumed control."
How true. Also, in the Constitutional oath, if the Founders had meant to write "I swear to obey the Supreme Court because no one else can be trusted to read plain English interpret it in good faith", then that's what they would've written. Instead, they had everyone take an oath to defend the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land.
RH
Post a Comment