The Supreme Court only interprets the laws Congress created. Perhaps Congress should be more explicit in the way they author said laws then there wouldn’t be so much to have to interpret.
Throw out the principle of following the plain language of the document and the original intent of the drafters and you are in a poker game where the rules are constantly changing. So says Walter Williams.
The courts are brought into things when the people can’t get it together enough to find a common ground. Considering the people were arguing over something that probably shouldn’t a matter of law at all the ruling in favor of gay marriage is long over due.
We means all. The constitution is for all the people. To protect all people’s rights and how the government should work.It is funny how conservatives say that the constitution should be interpreted to what its says and no more but seem to be fine with corporation as having the “same rights” as people and money equaling free speech. What is up with that?
Amazing, they’re only the “bad guys” when the right wingnuts lose a case, and have to grant rights and/or privileges (as in “common welfare”), to other than corporations.
There is a history of courts declaring laws or actions unconstitutional that predate Marbury vs Madison.The Quok Walker cases were about slave attempting to claim his freedom in Massachusetts. The man who claimed to be Walker’s owner was charged with assault. Here are Judge’s instruction to the jury:- As to the doctrine of slavery and the right of Christians to hold Africans in perpetual servitude, and sell and treat them as we do our horses and cattle, that (it is true) has been heretofore countenanced by the Province Laws formerly, but nowhere is it expressly enacted or established. It has been a usage — a usage which took its origin from the practice of some of the European nations, and the regulations of British government respecting the then Colonies, for the benefit of trade and wealth. But whatever sentiments have formerly prevailed in this particular or slid in upon us by the example of others, a different idea has taken place with the people of America, more favorable to the natural rights of mankind, and to that natural, innate desire of Liberty, with which Heaven (without regard to color, complexion, or shape of noses-features) has inspired all the human race. And upon this ground our Constitution of Government, by which the people of this Commonwealth have solemnly bound themselves, sets out with declaring that all men are born free and equal — and that every subject is entitled to liberty, and to have it guarded by the laws, as well as life and property
— and in short is totally repugnant to the idea of being born slaves. This being the case, I think the idea of slavery is inconsistent with our own conduct and Constitution; and there can be no such thing as perpetual servitude of a rational creature, unless his liberty is forfeited by some criminal conduct or given up by personal consent or contract ….
There were cases prior to Marbury vs Madison in which the Supreme Court was asked to rule on the Constitutionality of laws but the court ruled that the law was constitutional (Hylton vs. United States, 1796).
The saddest part about this cartoon isn’t Varvel’s ideology, it’s his ignorance of American history.
Oh goodness, what a load of hooey. You guys live in the land of wishful thinking. The Supreme Court made the only decision that it was capable of making. The law is the law, you can’t just wish it away, even if you dislike it, or the decision. Grow up.
@FishDog93Does the surviving spouse who was married for 30 years get a bigger share than the surviving spouse who was married for 10 years? If Tom can marry Susan and Linda, Susan can also marry Jim in addition to Tom? So each individual can have multiple spouses. Like I said before, laws against polygamy can be applied equally, laws against same-sex marriage can’t.
ChevJames007; ever seen any of the men’s foppery in that period, espcially in Europe, but also in the colonies, may have been some gay blades making those shaves, even in those days.
Yes, we hate the judicial branch, we hate the executive branch and we hate nearly half of the legislative branch. And we hate the way the Constitution lets the three branches balance each other..Cause we LOVE America! Yeah! That’s why!
Public acts, Records, and Judicial proceedings. Marriage in the state form is a public act with the ceremony. Marriage in the state form is recorded with a start date and in the state form a marriage license is issued. So when we separate church from state as we are supposed to by the intent of the authors this should never be an issue. It’s an issue NOW because people don’t want to separate church from state. Use a little common sense and stop overthinking this.
Darque Hellmutt almost 9 years ago
Amen.
echoraven almost 9 years ago
Is this in reference to 1 particular ruling?
ObsiWan Premium Member almost 9 years ago
The Supreme Court only interprets the laws Congress created. Perhaps Congress should be more explicit in the way they author said laws then there wouldn’t be so much to have to interpret.
moderateisntleft almost 9 years ago
2007, isn’t that the year the conservatives brought us the Patriot Act? yes, the death of America…
elvoycehooper almost 9 years ago
Throw out the principle of following the plain language of the document and the original intent of the drafters and you are in a poker game where the rules are constantly changing. So says Walter Williams.
3pibgorn9 almost 9 years ago
And I suppose you interpret the Bible literally and that every word is dictated by God.
The Constitution, like Scripture, is open to interpretation and always has been since the time of John Marshall.
BE THIS GUY almost 9 years ago
I’m sure Gary Varvel would have drawn the same cartoon after he heard the news on May 17, 1954.
eugene57 almost 9 years ago
Justice Clarence Thomas must dislike his wife as he seems to want the ruling that made it legal for them to marry, invalidated.
tjimlee almost 9 years ago
If you like your Constitution you get to keep your Constitution…
tengu99 almost 9 years ago
The courts are brought into things when the people can’t get it together enough to find a common ground. Considering the people were arguing over something that probably shouldn’t a matter of law at all the ruling in favor of gay marriage is long over due.
PainterArt Premium Member almost 9 years ago
We means all. The constitution is for all the people. To protect all people’s rights and how the government should work.It is funny how conservatives say that the constitution should be interpreted to what its says and no more but seem to be fine with corporation as having the “same rights” as people and money equaling free speech. What is up with that?
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
Amazing, they’re only the “bad guys” when the right wingnuts lose a case, and have to grant rights and/or privileges (as in “common welfare”), to other than corporations.
BE THIS GUY almost 9 years ago
There is a history of courts declaring laws or actions unconstitutional that predate Marbury vs Madison.The Quok Walker cases were about slave attempting to claim his freedom in Massachusetts. The man who claimed to be Walker’s owner was charged with assault. Here are Judge’s instruction to the jury:- As to the doctrine of slavery and the right of Christians to hold Africans in perpetual servitude, and sell and treat them as we do our horses and cattle, that (it is true) has been heretofore countenanced by the Province Laws formerly, but nowhere is it expressly enacted or established. It has been a usage — a usage which took its origin from the practice of some of the European nations, and the regulations of British government respecting the then Colonies, for the benefit of trade and wealth. But whatever sentiments have formerly prevailed in this particular or slid in upon us by the example of others, a different idea has taken place with the people of America, more favorable to the natural rights of mankind, and to that natural, innate desire of Liberty, with which Heaven (without regard to color, complexion, or shape of noses-features) has inspired all the human race. And upon this ground our Constitution of Government, by which the people of this Commonwealth have solemnly bound themselves, sets out with declaring that all men are born free and equal — and that every subject is entitled to liberty, and to have it guarded by the laws, as well as life and property
— and in short is totally repugnant to the idea of being born slaves. This being the case, I think the idea of slavery is inconsistent with our own conduct and Constitution; and there can be no such thing as perpetual servitude of a rational creature, unless his liberty is forfeited by some criminal conduct or given up by personal consent or contract ….
There were cases prior to Marbury vs Madison in which the Supreme Court was asked to rule on the Constitutionality of laws but the court ruled that the law was constitutional (Hylton vs. United States, 1796).
The saddest part about this cartoon isn’t Varvel’s ideology, it’s his ignorance of American history.
kaffekup almost 9 years ago
Any documentation on that, other than that it says so?
Durak Premium Member almost 9 years ago
Oh goodness, what a load of hooey. You guys live in the land of wishful thinking. The Supreme Court made the only decision that it was capable of making. The law is the law, you can’t just wish it away, even if you dislike it, or the decision. Grow up.
BE THIS GUY almost 9 years ago
@FishDog93Does the surviving spouse who was married for 30 years get a bigger share than the surviving spouse who was married for 10 years? If Tom can marry Susan and Linda, Susan can also marry Jim in addition to Tom? So each individual can have multiple spouses. Like I said before, laws against polygamy can be applied equally, laws against same-sex marriage can’t.
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
ChevJames007; ever seen any of the men’s foppery in that period, espcially in Europe, but also in the colonies, may have been some gay blades making those shaves, even in those days.
Michael Peterson Premium Member almost 9 years ago
Yes, we hate the judicial branch, we hate the executive branch and we hate nearly half of the legislative branch. And we hate the way the Constitution lets the three branches balance each other..Cause we LOVE America! Yeah! That’s why!
ubablackhamma almost 9 years ago
Public acts, Records, and Judicial proceedings. Marriage in the state form is a public act with the ceremony. Marriage in the state form is recorded with a start date and in the state form a marriage license is issued. So when we separate church from state as we are supposed to by the intent of the authors this should never be an issue. It’s an issue NOW because people don’t want to separate church from state. Use a little common sense and stop overthinking this.