This is why, whenever I hear anyone describe a court's decision as a 'ruling' I push back: "These courts are not our Rulers; the do not rule, they do not issue rulings; the issues opinions."
And this means we are free to ignore opinions that are unconstitutional.
Yes, Yes, Yes.... I've been saying it for years, the judges you vote for matter... too often we hear "the courts will overturn this or that law" and then seemed crushed when they don't. Judicial activism is running amok through this country.
“Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others." --ANDREW JACKSON
"You seem to think it devolved on the judges to decide on the validity of the sedition law. But nothing in the Constitution has given them a right to decide for the Executive more than to the Executive to decide for them. Both magistrates are equally independent in the sphere of action assigned to them. The judges, believing the law constitutional, had a right to pass a sentence... But the executive, believing the law to be unconstitutional, were bound to remit the execution of it; because that power is confided to them by the Constitution." —THOMAS JEFFERSON
This is why, whenever I hear anyone describe a court's decision as a 'ruling' I push back: "These courts are not our Rulers; the do not rule, they do not issue rulings; the issues opinions."
ReplyDeleteAnd this means we are free to ignore opinions that are unconstitutional.
Yes, Yes, Yes.... I've been saying it for years, the judges you vote for matter... too often we hear "the courts will overturn this or that law" and then seemed crushed when they don't. Judicial activism is running amok through this country.
ReplyDelete“Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others."
ReplyDelete--ANDREW JACKSON
"You seem to think it devolved on the judges to decide on the validity of the sedition law. But nothing in the Constitution has given them a right to decide for the Executive more than to the Executive to decide for them. Both magistrates are equally independent in the sphere of action assigned to them. The judges, believing the law constitutional, had a right to pass a sentence... But the executive, believing the law to be unconstitutional, were bound to remit the execution of it; because that power is confided to them by the Constitution."
—THOMAS JEFFERSON
In MY "opinion", John Ross' method is quicker, cheaper, easier and FAR more effective than any other I've read about.
ReplyDelete-MM
And best of all, somone else gets to take all the risks and do all the work!
ReplyDelete