Quote:
Quote by: tivodan1116  You are actually proving his point.
His point is that when you agree, politically, with the Court's decision, you say it is a Constitutional part of their power to do what they are doing, etc. |
There is no evidence whatsoever of that claim.
Quote:
|
When you disagree with the Court's decision you say it is "unconstitutional interpretation" by the Supreme Court.
|
Again, there is no evidence of this. What I disagree with is the Court interpreting the Constitution itself. Whether I agree or disagree with what the Court says about a particular piece of legislation Congress or some state legislature passed is really irrelevant. As long as the Courts don't try to put their own opinions about what the Constitution (and its amendments) means in the place of what the authors of the Constitution and its amendments meant (as SCOTUS did in the case where it defined public use in a way that allows city governments to steal private property and sell it to a developer in order to get more in property taxes), and as long as the Courts don't rely on the laws of other nations, American public opinion or world opinion in their deliberations, it doesn't matter what I think about a particular decision.