[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Resistance See other Resistance Articles Title: CONTROLLERS CONTROLLING THE CONTROLLED - The Founding Fathers Warned Us About the Powers of the Supreme Court The Supreme Court acted as more than the highest court in the land this past week. They upheld an egregious Obamacare ruling, and then of course, legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states. Basically, the five justices in favor of allowing gays to wed have concluded that they no what is better for you than God himself. Face palm. No, more than a face palm. More like, head punch. The Founding Father of this great nation werent idiots, and they warned us about having a judicial body given lifetime appointments. Check out what they said over 230 years ago
From Louder with Crowder: What would the Founders say about what the Supreme Courts become? Theyd call it overruling. Theyd say Americans cannot long be free with such a centralized power dictating our laws. Theyd call it tyranny. Theyd call SCOTUS a despotic branch of government. As a matter of fact
they did. The powers properly belonging to one of the departments ought not to be directly and completely administered by either of the other departments. It is equally evident, that none of them ought to possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others, in the administration of their respective powers. It will not be denied, that power is of an encroaching nature, and that it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it. The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. A question arises whether all the powers of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, shall be left in this body? I think a people cannot be long free, nor ever happy, whose government is in one Assembly. [N]othing in the Constitution has given [the judiciary] a right to decide for the Executive, more than to the executive to decide for them. Both magistracies are equally independent in the sphere of action assigned to them
the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what are not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the Legislature & Executive also, in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch. [A] limited Constitution
can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing
To deny this would be to affirm
that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid. Of course, the liberal reaction is: What do a bunch of dead old white men know? Get them off my money! Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|