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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (228370)	4/8/2005 7:54:12 PM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578015

If they are blatant enough at doing so it could lead to a constitutional crisis. It leads to congress removing the judges...

To: TimF who wrote (228370)	4/9/2005 10:56:55 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578015

If a Constitutional Amendment is deemed unconstitutional, it will be invalidated. The only way it can be invalidated if it can be shown not to have been ratified correctly. Other than the method of ratification there is no legal check on what a constitutional amendment can do. A constitutional amendment is part of the constitution. There is no higher law in our system. There is no "check and balance" to toss out amendments as unconstitutional. The ability to override any court decision with a constitutional amendment is one of the checks on the courts. If congress and 2/3rds of the states vote in the amendment there is nothing that the USSC can do about it. At least there is nothing they can directly do about it. If they are really hostile to it they could try to ignore it in their decisions. If they are blatant enough at doing so it could lead to a constitutional crisis. That's not true. The only way a constitutional amendment can be unconstitutional and still be put into place is because Congress and 2/3 of state legislatures have gone rogue. Before Congress reviews and approves an amendment, it is reviewed by lawyers to determine its constitutionality. Typically, something like the prohibition of gay marriage will be determined to be unconstitutional even before it is written. However, should it get put into play without determining constitutionality and is passed by Congress and 2/3 of the state legislatures, the courts can declare it void. Of course, it probably won't matter because the gov't will have become so perverted to have even allowed such a thing in the first place that at that point they probably will not listen to anything the courts say and the checks and balances system will no longer exist. American jurisprudence says the following in regard to constitutionality: " The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed .. An unconstitutional law is void." 16AmJur 2nd, Sec. 178 en.wikipedia.org