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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (408012)	1/31/2011 6:04:29 PM
From: kumar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794024

U know what - my brief discussion on Amendments and judiciary - after years of part time study to get Naturalized, leads me to this question : How many of our "kids eligible to vote", have such an understanding ?

To: DMaA who wrote (408012)	1/31/2011 6:34:45 PM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794024

It is not a role the founders saw it having. There was a vacuum and the justices walked in and filled it That's an unwarranted assumption. It's a role the Founders did not write in Article III, but that doesn't mean they did not intend the judiciary to rule on legislation's constitutionality. The Founders understood the English common law system, and many were state legislators whose state constitutions' specifically incorporated English common law. It was foreseeable that the courts, intended to balance the other two branches, were to interpret the constitution and "make law" like any English common law court.