Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (3706)	8/29/2004 1:54:38 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 7936

On what do you base the view that it was "generally accepted" before Marshall grabbed the power? That's not my reading of the Federalist Papers. Tribe, in his American Constitutional Law, doesn't take that position. And as one of the more liberal Constitutional interpreters, you would think that if it were a colorable position, he would. Rather, he recognizes that Marshall was promoting his own power and that of the Federalist party (no direct relation to the Federalist Papers) against Jefferson's triumph in the "Revolution of 1800." His tenure on the bench had the effect, still going strong, of politicizing the Supereme Court. The contemporary battles over Supreme Court nominees are a direct result of Marshall's power grab; if the Court had not taken on itself the role of the sole interpreter of the Constitution, but had taken the position that whatever Congress and the President decreed was a constitutional law was, there could have been, as just one example, no Roe v. Wade, and the term Borking probably would never had come into existence.