House shoots down draft, 402-2

[BPSCG]

Well, since the Dems seem to be so concerned about keeping our military up to snuff, why don't they encourage institutions of higher learning such as Harvard University to end their policy of prohibiting ROTC on their campuses?

After all, if the Dems are to be believed, it's only the poor and uneducated who are going into the service now.Why not reinstate ROTC at Harvard so the rich and educated have a chance to go into the service, too?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Eminent domain doesn't help it much, as that's a Fifth Amendment violation.

OMFG!!!!



Is this guy really this stupid??? What a complete dumbass!!

 

[shanek]

The supreme court is not the last word. You can call a constitutional convention.

Yes, you can. Or Congress can repeal the law. Or the President can refuse to execute the law. Or police and prosecutors can refuse to enforce the law. Or juries can act to nullify the law. For that matter, a later Supreme Court can overturn the ruling.

And, of course, by extension, you can vote in Presidents and Congressmen who actually understand the Constitution and are willing to stand by it by repealing or refusing to execute all of the unconstitutional laws.

Bottom line: there IS NO last word, and there IS NO ultimate authority.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

There was never any single authority meant to "interpret" the Constitution or be the final word on what it said. Congress, the President, the police, the prosecutors, the courts, the voters, the juries, ALL of them were thought to have the capacity to read the Constitution, understand what it says, and act to stop anything that is in abeyance with the Constitution. At any point along the way, if even one of them determines that a law or an action is unconstitutional, it stops right then and there.

So what shanek is saying is that everyone's interpretation of the constitution is equally valid, and therefore, everyone can do whatever they want.

Unbelievable.

Not suprising though. This is the same guy who claimed on another thread that it was unconstitutional for a Senator to vote on a bill.

 

[merphie]

So what shanek is saying is that everyone's interpretation of the constitution is equally valid, and therefore, everyone can do whatever they want.

Shanek just supports a literal meaning from the constitution.