Letters to the Editor
-
How lucky we are
to have a President--who in Snow's words is "the only person who, by the Constitution, is given the responsibility to preserve, protect, and defend [the constitution]--who wasn't smart enough be accepted into the University of Texas Law School. His father couldn't pull strings to get him in, so he didn't get in. And now it's his job, to interpret the constitution? Heaven help us all...
-
Tony Snow: Less Than Zero
Mr. Snow neglected to include the part where the President must faithfully execute the office - which means if, say, there's a law making warrantless wiretapping a felony = he can't violate it.
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Further, the Constituion states clearly that
[The] Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land
.
which means that since the US ratified the Geneva Accords, no stupid freakin' Presidential finding can be used to defeat the clear intent of the supreme law of the land. The day of accounting approaches - at some point the Supreme Court will address these issues, and, as Justice Kennedy said to the ABA last month:
The rule of law is binding upon the government and all of its officials
-
Forget about those old dead guys
The America that was set up by Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, Franklin, etc. no longer exists. Like Esau in the Bible selling his birthright for a bowl of soup, this nation has abandoned its founding principles for a phony promise of security. I don't plan on leaving, but I'm not fooling myself in thinking that I live in the country I was brought up to revere. We live in a bread and circuses national security state, complete with its own little Caligula.
-
Not so fast, George
Below are sections 1 and 2 of Article III of the Constitution:
"Article III
Section 1. The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
"Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects."
Sounds like the Supreme Court decides constitutional issues.
The oaths taken by members of Congress and by enlisting servicemen and women include the words, "...defend the Constitution of the United States...."
Sorry, George, but lots of people are sworn to defend that piece of paper you hate so much.
This is a despicable administration led by a despicable man who sees nothing wrong with the destruction of 230 years' work to expand liberty and rights to all the people of the United States. And the Democrats say nothing and do nothing. Shame on all of us. We are witnessing the death of our democracy. And the fatal wound is self-inflicted.
-
"preserve, protect, and defend," NOT "interprete"
It is tiresome to have to point out something SO basic. We don't even require references to constitutional philosophies set forth in the Federalist Papers.
ARTICLE VI
"... This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution..."
Bush is BOUND by it just as is every other citizen, and the primus inter pares power to enforce it (by interpretation, even against a President) is simply the ultimate province of the Supreme Court:
ARTICLE III
"Section 1. The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects...
____
Snow, STFU, you moron.
-
Marbury v. Madison
To paraphrase the language that Chief Justice Marshall used in Marbury v. Madison, the first case that any law student reads in any Constitutional Law class anywhere in this country: it is emphatically the province of the courts to say what the law is.