Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk-Eye  " Judge Strikes Down Part of Patriot Act"
Marrero's lengthy judicial opinion, akin to an eighth-grade civics lesson, described why the framers of the Constitution created three separate but equal branches of government and delegated to the judiciary to say what the law is and to protect the Constitution and the rights it gives citizens.
He said when ``the judiciary lowers its guard on the Constitution, it opens the door to far-reaching invasions of liberty.''
He said Congress, in the original USA Patriot Act and less so in a 2005 revision, had essentially tried to legislate how the judiciary must review challenges to the law. If done to other bills, they ultimately could all ``be styled to make the validation of the law foolproof.''
In that event, he said, the judiciary could become ``a mere mouthpiece of the legislature.''
Regarding the national security letters, he said, Congress crossed its boundaries so dramatically that to let the law stand might turn an innocent legislative step into ``the legislative equivalent of breaking and entering, with an ominous free pass to the hijacking of constitutional values.''
Marrero said the constitutional barriers against governmental abuse ``may eventually collapse, with consequential diminution of the judiciary's function, and hence potential dire effects to individual freedoms.'' |
Quote:
Originally Posted by chevydriver1123 How long till some right winger cries "Activist Judge" |
And, as it should be, the system corrects itself. Things were put into effect during trying times to further the duty and power of the executive in conductin the things it needed during a time of great potential danger. As that time wears down, the balance shifts from security to freedom, and the court does its job in removing things and setting back the balance.
This is why our system is wonderful. Throughout our history, again and again, during times of great strife the legislature of the executive...and sometimes along with the judiciary...perform actions that are adverse to the ideals the framers presented as the "normal" actions for this country in exchange for assuring the security of it in the hope for the continuence of the country.
Likewise...
Like those past times, those measures enacted in the hope of security and longevity begin to be removed, repealed, and revoked as the balance shifts back to freedom and we get farther away from the need for security.
Periods of peace will then ensue for some time till the next point in time comes that we are placed in a potential for grave danger, once again the shift will go back towards security, once again the people will accept it, and once again the cycle will continue.
If only such a cycle existed for shifting back and forth between the amount of government involvement in private matters -.-