It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by Janky Red
Can the Constitution create something un-Constitutional?
What’s a “Supreme Clauser”? Someone who doesn’t deny it exists?
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
You Supremacy Clausers are funny.
I didn’t miss anything, I’m well aware of the whole language of the clause. It is you, apparently, who have missed the two main points I raised: the principle of presumption of constitutionality, and that it is for the judicial branch to determine the constitutionality of laws when they are questioned.
You always HAPPEN to miss one small but very important detail . . .
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States, which shall be made in Pursuance thereof . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land." Did you catch it? The laws of the land must be made in pursuance of the Constitution.
[I]t is not on slight implication and vague conjecture that the Legislature is to be pronounced to have transcended its powers, and its acts to be considered as void. The opposition between the Constitution and the law should be such that the judge feels a clear and strong conviction of their incompatibility with each other.
It is but a decent respect due to the wisdom, the integrity, and the patriotism of the legislative body by which any law is passed to presume in favor of its validity until its violation of the Constitution is proved beyond all reasonable doubt. This has always been the language of this Court when that subject has called for its decision
Who said Arizona couldn’t pass the bill?
Furthermore . . . Arizona may pass this bill.
You recognize the bill, if adopted, has to be challenged in court by the federal government, but yet here you are arguing that Arizona’s legislature can ignore federal laws it, by itself, determines to be unconstitutional, without intervention of the judiciary.
It will be up to the Feds to take it to the Supreme Court.
Originally posted by aptness
You recognize the bill, if adopted, has to be challenged in court by the federal government, but yet here you are arguing that Arizona’s legislature can ignore federal laws it, by itself, determines to be unconstitutional, without intervention of the judiciary.
It will be up to the Feds to take it to the Supreme Court.
Is this what you are arguing that has happened? Or is it merely hypothetical?
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
And what happens when the Supreme Court Justices become corrupt or have other "interests" other than the law of the land or the Constitution?
Originally posted by Janky Red
. . .
Traitors always find ways to justify their treachery
The constitution states that the determination of constitutionality of LAW is in the hands of the supreme court...
Therefore, they are in violation of the supreme law of the land
Originally posted by Janky Red
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by Janky Red
Can the Constitution create something un-Constitutional?
Don't play footsy with me
You damn well know the supreme court was created specifically to determine questions of constitutionality of law
Originally posted by aptness
. . .
You recognize the bill, if adopted, has to be challenged in court by the federal government, but yet here you are arguing that Arizona’s legislature can ignore federal laws it, by itself, determines to be unconstitutional, without intervention of the judiciary.
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Originally posted by Janky Red
No . . . that was legislated by the Supreme Court in the Marbury v Madison case in the early 1800's.
It was up to the people and the states to decide what was Constitutional before that.
Section 8 grants the Federal government its power below - refers to the enumerated list prior to
this clause
"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
You are posing a phony argument...
Please show me where the tenth amendment states that a radical state legistlature can nullify any FEDERAL law they like based upon their opinion/s.
If members of Congress, the executive branch, and the Supreme Court all read the Constitution carefully, they will realize that government derives its powers from the “consent of the governed.” Essentially, the founders drafted the Constitution with an understanding that American citizens should have the ultimate say.
Well you appear to be advocating a revocation of the section 8, while placing all legal determinations into the
hands of politicians. Then after you proclaim the nullification of the document that creates the framework
for consent of the governed, you jump the tracks again and reference the constitution after you propose neutering
it. This post is working on triple speak my amigo
When you combine judicial review with a political agenda, power is taken from the most important branch of government . . . Congress. When this happens, the executive branch and the Supreme Court are essentially creating a new form of government, an oligarchy.
this is your opinion and is seperate from the legitimcy of the AZ political agenda of state level oligarchy or GOP "autocracy" at the state level
The purpose is to ensure that law does not violate the constitution, to
The purpose of the Supreme Court is not to interpret the constitution. The purpose of the Supreme Court is to enforce the constitution.
restrain governance
Wrong.
Ya you are
before you cite the tenth you should read the ninth
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The Arizona Senate is using the Tenth in the very way that evokes the Ninth... Now the citizens of Arizona are subject to the whims of what partisans deem as constitutional...
edit on 6-3-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Arizona looks to change that back to its original form, and very well may do so using the 10th Amendment.
Originally posted by muse7
Well, I guess we should stop giving Arizona Federal money. They want to nullify federal laws and pass their own? Fine let them, In fact I wouldn't care if the United States kicked out AZ out of the Union. They then can create and live happily in the little police state that they so badly want.edit on 3/5/2011 by muse7 because:
Originally posted by muse7
Well, I guess we should stop giving Arizona Federal money. They want to nullify federal laws and pass their own? Fine let them, In fact I wouldn't care if the United States kicked out AZ out of the Union. They then can create and live happily in the little police state that they so badly want.edit on 3/5/2011 by muse7 because:
Originally posted by Vitchilo
I can't believe this wasn't posted on ATS....
Still, EPIC. All states need to pass that to tell the feds to go play in the bushes.
The feds don't follow the constitution? NULLIFY their law. Simple as that.
They should do this on old laws the feds passed. After all, the feds have done this kind of thing for decades now.
The only duties of the federal government is defending the border, making treaties and regulating interstate commerce (which they are abusing the power of).
TENTH AMENDMENT! Thomas Jefferson was the man.
tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
In other words, nullify any law that is unconstitutional or outside the scope of the Constitution. No state, person, politician, officer of the law, has to obey any law from the United States government that is unconstitutional or outside of the scope of the Constitution, period.
Originally posted by taskforce4256
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
I think most Arizonans would be willing to keep their funds in state and tell the feds to keep theirs. I'll bet about 90% of the federal return to the state goes to about 5% of the population, and most of that to "non-legal" residents. Once you pry your lips from the federal tit, you might actually become productive!
Originally posted by The Sword
Why doesn't Arizona just shut the hell up and secede already?
Seriously, who's stopping them?
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by CIGGSofWAR
Hey Jethro, are you blind or just plain stupid?
Do you really think that the Feds are going to sit there and let a bunch of hicks throw crap on their lawn?
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
Good for them. Seems like they just want another Civil War so they can parade their true intentions in blackface in front of other Americans.