• Als Spam markieren
• Beitrag melden

• 
  Diese Gruppe Alles

• Archiv
• RSS-Feeds

• Kontakt
• Hilfe
• Impressum
• Datenschutz

Jefferson's support of Fed court system

http://www.csulb.edu/~crsmith/alien.htm

In a letter to Madison on March 15th, 1789, Jefferson made a very important
point that has direct bearing on the doctrine of original intent. He said
he supported a bill of rights because of the power it gave to the judicial
branch. The legislative branch achieved its power through the legislation
it passed; the executive branch had wide ranging powers to enforce laws,
draft treaties, and administer the government. But Jefferson wisely and
prophetically noted that the judicial branch's power rested on sand. Thus,
a clearly stated bill of rights was essential if the court system, and
particularly the Supreme Court, was to have anything to interpret at all.
Even with a bill of rights, it would later take John Marshall's brilliant
decision in Marbury v. Madison to establish the Supreme Court's power to
review legislation to determine if it passed constitutional muster.

***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:

The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm

The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html

[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]

HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/

***************************************************************
. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning.  Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic."  New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
. . .
****************************************************************
James Veverka wrote:
One of the ways to counter the attack on American Constitutional principles
by the religious right is to address their revisionism, misinformation and
distortions.

****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote

"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"

That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.

It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.

*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html

****************************************************************

Antworten