Justice Roberts, you miss, or ignore, the truth spoken by President Trump

What wording in our Constitution confers a power to “interpret” the Constitution? The answer is, there is no such power granted. In fact, the Constitution is explicitly clear with reference to a judge’s and Justice’s fundamental assignment. Their job, as outlined in the very text of our Constitution is, to support and defend “this Constitution”, and in doing so, they are to observe “the rules of the common law”. Keep in mind, the most fundamental rule, under the rules of the common law, is an adherence to the documented legislative intent of our Constitution, which is far different from offering an interpretation of its text.

But I do appreciate you opinion.

JWK

The fundamental principle of constitutional construction is that effect must be given to the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people adopting it. This is the polestar in the construction of constitutions, all other principles of construction are only rules or guides to aid in the determination of the intention of the constitution’s framers.— numerous citations omitted__ Vol.16 American Jurisprudence, 2d Constitutional law (1992 edition), pages 418-19 - - - Par. 92. Intent of framers and adopters as controlling.

Article 3, 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.

Lol look at deportations during his term.

If you knew constitutional law you would know how things work

Deporting the same person a 100 times doesn’t count.

The OP misses the fact Fat Donald never speaks the truth when a lie will suffice, and for Fat Donald, a lie will always suffice.

1 Like

lol smurt :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

1 Like

Spurious partisan hyperbole apparently counts for everything with you.

Because that’s the way the founders set it up.

Nobody’s minds will be changed on this topic. I’m not going to read all of those cut-and-paste jobs, either.

1 Like

You like that I see.

Neither like it nor dislike it. It just is an observation I have made.

You never answered my question. What wording in our Constitution confers a power to “interpret” the Constitution?

What you quoted are the jurisdictional limits of the judicial Power of the United States. Seems to me you are intentionally ignoring fundamental directives placed upon our judges and Justices:

Article VI, last Clause:

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; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Are you suggesting there are no rules which govern constitutional construction?

JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides, that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story

Jusicial review. That is all

What makes your interpretation right and others wrong?

Here’s my problem with our nations politics in today’s day and age in general:

Both sides want to use the federal government to impose thier ideas on the other side. Sometimes the republicans pass something the left doesn’t like. Sometimes the democrats pass something the right doesn’t like.

The fact remains that doing this is the exact opposite of what our system was designed to do. If if the federal government stuck to the few functions it was supposed to perform, the states would be free to do “almost” anything they wanted as long as it wasn’t something forbidden by the BoR.

The fact that we have allowed the government into all these other areas of our lives is one of the main reasons politics is getting so bitter.

I find it rather ironic that many libs idolize Europe. If we followed the constitution, our country would be very similar to Europe. A uniform currency, shared defense, trade between the “states”. But little else. Other things would be ruled on at the smaller level. States in our case, smaller nations in the EUs case.

The Constitution does not have a glossary of terms. Not every word or phrase in the Constitution is expressly defined. “Judicial Power” is one of those non defined terms. Was that an oversight of the framers or was it simply that the role of the judicial branch was expressly understood. Look at any grade school text book, the answer is clearly defined.

The role of the federal judicial branch is to interpret laws, apply laws to specific cases and determine constitutionality of laws. Determining constitutionality requires interpretation. The Constitution is not an all encompassing document.

If the words “Trump” and “truth” are used in the same sentence, you know a damn good punch line is coming…

1 Like

Well, not since Marbury anyway.

Once again the dear leader shows his inept for the job. Why don’t people wake up to his delusional tendencies? Can’t you all see he wants loyalty above all else? We have three separate branches of government with checks and balances, something he has no understanding of.

1 Like