[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Supreme Court Overturns Constitution Supreme Court Overturns Constitution http://lr.com | 14 Jun 2007 | by Max Raskin WASHINGTON – In a surprise decision bound to become a landmark case of the 21st century, the Supreme Court today ruled, eight-to-one, against the Constitution. In Bush v. Constitution, the issue before the court was, "whether the Constitution’s antiquated espousal of ‘liberty’ and ‘checks and balances’ should definitively establish the powers of federal government." The case was brought up after President Bush filed an injunction against the document because of what he called, "the dangerous undermining of the War on Terror by the Bill of Rights." Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, in his brief to the Court, noted, "Every student of political science is taught that the Constitution was intended to be a flexible document, and after much deliberation and careful thought, the President has decided to flex the document to its logical conclusion – irrelevance." Gonzales, previously under close scrutiny from Congress, was elated with the news declaring, "Not only will the decision offer the administration full immunity, but we will finally be given all the tools necessary to combat terrorism. No longer will obstructions like due process and habeas corpus get in the way of the president and his plans." The court’s decision draws heavily on the legal tradition of judicial review, which was established in the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison. The Marshall Court ruled that the Judiciary had the power to strike down any law that the courts deemed a violation of the Constitution. Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority opinion wrote that, "…clearly the Constitution and Bill of Rights are a violation of the general welfare clause. I think that the federal government should have the power to do anything it can to benefit the common man. We live in modern times and quaint anachronisms like the First and Second Amendment have no real relevance anymore." Though the Constitution had an amending process, Justice Breyer demurred that, "the people of the United States should not be burdened with the task of voting on Constitutional revisions. Moreover, the insistence that the citizenry be required to read amendments in English violates the 14th and 33rd Amendments." Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg attacked one of the document’s early supports, labeling Thomas Jefferson as, "a bigoted slave-owner" whose "provincial views on political philosophy are on par with those of NASCAR fans." President Bush hailed the decision as a victory against the terrorists. "September 11th changed everything, either you are with us or you are with the Constitution. Unless I have the power to interpretate as I see fit, then the terrorists win. Constitutionalists have shown themselves to be in league with bin Laden and al-Qaeda, and must be considered enemies of the state – thankfully they will not be able to hind behind the criminalized Bill of Rights any longer." Surprisingly, Nadine Strossen, president of the ACLU, has also lauded the decision as a "step in the right direction for progressivism." Although Strossen is, "a little concerned about the abandonment of our civil liberties," she is confident that, "the state will use its power to enact social justice legislation that had previously been denied." Sole dissent came from Justice John Paul Stevens, who slept through oral arguments, but nevertheless declared, "I would never concur with that asshole Scalia." Little defense has been mounted for the document over fear of prosecution, but insiders close to hotel heiress Paris Hilton revealed that the true cause of her tears was not a mental breakdown, but rather her reaction to news of the court’s decision. Meanwhile, President Bush has ordered a massive crackdown on all dissent within the nation, targeting newspaper editors and online bloggers. Even Congressman Ron Paul, an ardent supporter of the Constitution, could not escape from the fallout. After questioned over Paul’s deportation to Vermont, the president defended his actions as, "pulling a Lincoln." June 14, 2007 Max Raskin goes to high school in New Jersey.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 5.
#1. To: Give Me Liberty (#0)
This almost smells like The Onion.
This is probably closer to the truth than we think.
There are no replies to Comment # 5. End Trace Mode for Comment # 5.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||