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: tejek who wrote (229516)	4/18/2005 6:53:37 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1573994

That a "living constitution" is effectively no constitution. We have no firm limits, just a judical branch above all, able to make up its own rules as it goes with the possible limitation that it not change the rules to quickly. That's wrong and not true. Its very much true. The only protection from it is that the courts can only "change" the constitution slowly as "understanding evolves". If they change it to suddenly they would go against their normal moder of behavior and even risk a constitutional crisis. The constitution either means what it says or it means whatever the court says it means. If the former than decisions like Roe vs. Wade are faulty at their very core, if the latter than there is nothing to stop the court from slowly "evolving" the constitution in to something completly unrecognizable, except the amendment process, but than in your opinion the courts can declare amendments to be unconstitutional. Tim