View Poll Results: Is the Supreme Court being the Ultimate Arbiter of Constituionality a Problem?

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • The Supreme Court is not the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality

    6 17.65%
  • The supreme court is the ultimate arbiter and there are no problems with that

    5 14.71%
  • The supreme court is the ultimate arbiter and there are problems but it is the best system possible

    14 41.18%
  • the SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter its a problem, but there are ways to improve (explain)

    8 23.53%
  • Other/Don't Know

    1 2.94%
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 80

Thread: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

  1. #61
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:08 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,432

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    If not the supreme court, then who? Certainly not congress. It would completely eradicate checks and balances to allow congress to declare its own laws constitutional. The supreme court's position as arbiters of constitutionality serve as an excellent balance against congress, and allow revisiting of older problems later down the line. That our court system, as a whole, is equipped to analyze whether or not a law is a valid is a great thing.
    This is pretty much my thought. Somebody has to be. The whole reason we have courts, let alone a Supreme Court, is because people are simply unable to police themselves.

    Granted, Our SC isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination. They are designed to be above politics, to not be a rubber stamp, to not make up things as they go along... yet they still do all of those on occasion. But, they also do the right thing for the right reasons quite often. They're human, too, and as long as humans are involved in anything, it will be imperfect.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    The SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter and there's no way around the fact that an ultimate arbiter is needed in some form. You cannot have two separate but equal bodies determining what law is and how it is applied, the Constitution is in itself law and likewise you cannot have two bodies being the ultimate decider on constitutional issues because who's would you go with? One has to outweigh the other. Also you'll always have an "ultimate" arbiter by default since its whatever is the highest court.

    This country could not function without a SCOTUS being the ultimate authority on the Constitution, some suggest that the states could do it but there's two problems with that. 1) You can't have 50 different determinations on what the Constitution means, and 2) doing so would be putting the states above the Federal government since if the Feds do something the state doesn't like they can just say its unconstitutional and ignore it.

    And I'm not even talking about controversial issues, I'm talking about things that clearly within the authority of the Federal government, specifically the Congress. In 1832 South Carolina attempted to nullify a federal law which regulated trade, something literally spelled out in the Constitution as a power of Congress. If the states can decide by themselves, not even as a group, what is and isn't constitutional than you might as well not even have a Federal government because it will be totally powerless.

    Nullification Crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  3. #63
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Central Jersey
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 03:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    256

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    I can only hope that there are no more "corporations are people, my friend" or "money is speech" rulings in this term. Because when a majority of the Justices say something like that, it means that the Supreme Court is lying.

    Get Ready For A Huge Year For The Supreme Court

  4. #64
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Anagram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    6,198

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    The SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter and there's no way around the fact that an ultimate arbiter is needed in some form. You cannot have two separate but equal bodies determining what law is and how it is applied, the Constitution is in itself law and likewise you cannot have two bodies being the ultimate decider on constitutional issues because who's would you go with? One has to outweigh the other. Also you'll always have an "ultimate" arbiter by default since its whatever is the highest court.

    This country could not function without a SCOTUS being the ultimate authority on the Constitution, some suggest that the states could do it but there's two problems with that. 1) You can't have 50 different determinations on what the Constitution means, and 2) doing so would be putting the states above the Federal government since if the Feds do something the state doesn't like they can just say its unconstitutional and ignore it.

    And I'm not even talking about controversial issues, I'm talking about things that clearly within the authority of the Federal government, specifically the Congress. In 1832 South Carolina attempted to nullify a federal law which regulated trade, something literally spelled out in the Constitution as a power of Congress. If the states can decide by themselves, not even as a group, what is and isn't constitutional than you might as well not even have a Federal government because it will be totally powerless.

    Nullification Crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    This is pretty much my thought. Somebody has to be. The whole reason we have courts, let alone a Supreme Court, is because people are simply unable to police themselves.

    Granted, Our SC isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination. They are designed to be above politics, to not be a rubber stamp, to not make up things as they go along... yet they still do all of those on occasion. But, they also do the right thing for the right reasons quite often. They're human, too, and as long as humans are involved in anything, it will be imperfect.
    Both of you make good arguments and that's pretty much where I stand. I still wonder if there are any improvements that can be made to our system though, even though I believe the SCOTUS is pretty much our best option. Maybe term limits or changing the way our justices are appointed, although I see problems with both of those.
    There should be Instant Runoff Voting

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    I know some people like to say and its often taught in schools that the SCOTUS grabbed the power of judicial review in Marburry vs. Madison, but frankly I think that's wrong since I believe the Constitution quite clearly gives the SCOTUS that power.

    So article 3 which defines the judicial branch says

    The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. . . . 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. . . . In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
    And the Suprmacy Clause says

    This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. . . . [A]ll 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.
    So article 3 says the judical power of the SCOTUS extends to all cases arises in law, then the supremacy clause refers to the Constitution, and a bunch of other things, as the Supreme Law of the Land. So if the SCOTUS has judical power over all caes arising in law, and the Constitution is law, then therefore whenever there's a disagreement over a Constitutional issue the Supreme Court has the final say.

    Besides someone has to apply the Constitution to law, otherwise its meaningless.

  6. #66
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Anagram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    6,198

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    I know some people like to say and its often taught in schools that the SCOTUS grabbed the power of judicial review in Marburry vs. Madison, but frankly I think that's wrong since I believe the Constitution quite clearly gives the SCOTUS that power.

    So article 3 which defines the judicial branch says



    And the Suprmacy Clause says



    So article 3 says the judical power of the SCOTUS extends to all cases arises in law, then the supremacy clause refers to the Constitution, and a bunch of other things, as the Supreme Law of the Land. So if the SCOTUS has judical power over all caes arising in law, and the Constitution is law, then therefore whenever there's a disagreement over a Constitutional issue the Supreme Court has the final say.

    Besides someone has to apply the Constitution to law, otherwise its meaningless.
    I agree with you there. Besides that, it seems pretty clear that at least some proponents and opponents of judicial review believed that the SCOTUS would have that power under the constitution.
    There should be Instant Runoff Voting

  7. #67
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,837

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    The SCOTUS took up what I am calling, "SON of CITIZENs UNITED" today.
    Quote Originally Posted by Comunitee View Post
    I can only hope that there are no more "corporations are people, my friend" or "money is speech" rulings in this term. Because when a majority of the Justices say something like that, it means that the Supreme Court is lying.

    Get Ready For A Huge Year For The Supreme Court

  8. #68
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,837

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    And there are certainly a whole set of new "Voting Rights Laws" that should make it to the SCOTUS in 2014, easily a top issue of our times.
    Quote Originally Posted by Anagram View Post
    I agree with you there. Besides that, it seems pretty clear that at least some proponents and opponents of judicial review believed that the SCOTUS would have that power under the constitution.

  9. #69
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,868
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    I've always considered Congress the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality, since they can (in theory) change the constitution. I think?
    They can't change the words....but they can change a meaning. Ex: Obamacare where it decided that the governments power to tax extends to making people pay a fine for NOT buying from private corporations.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #70
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,752

    Re: Supreme Court as the Ultimate Arbiter?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    They can't change the words....but they can change a meaning. Ex: Obamacare where it decided that the governments power to tax extends to making people pay a fine for NOT buying from private corporations.
    I think they can ADD words.

    Not sure about changing.

    And "Obamacare" was not in any way a constitutional amendment, so far as I know...

    Besides which, the SCOTUS said something to em along the lines of "no, you can't fine em', but you can call it a tax and then we're good".

    Tis a tax, like everyone always knew.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •