Quote:

Wingnut-EL said:
What exactly do you mean by that PenWing. I hear the comment a lot, but never understand what people are complaining about.

Isn't it the job (or part of the job) of the Supreme Court to determine what is or isn't constitutional?

If they overrule or confirm a given bit of legislation, or the application of legislation, isn't that just fulfilling their constitutional role?

If the legislature or the executive gets to set law indiscriminantly (or allow prosecuters to enforce it w/o judicial oversight) is there even a need for a constitution?

When you get right down to it isn't the independent judiciary what sets the US system apart from most others? The true source of our freedoms?

Cheers!



I meant exactly what G-man said. The court's job is not to create law. It's job is to determine whether or not the law fits the framework of the constitution. Sometimes, this line is blurred, and that can lead the court to creating law, or, as it is called, legislating from the bench.

<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion
RDCW Profile

"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs

"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>