« Some judges.... | Main | The truth about terminal ballistics »
Randy Barnett cleans a "living constitutionalist's" clock
Here. I think the real objection living constitutionalists have to originalism is that it frustrates judges' wills to power. Rather than conduct social engineering, they must execute the will of others (the framers, or framing generations, of 1788, 1791 and 1868).
But, as the framers themselves pointed out, that is precisely why they thought we could have a non-elected judiciary. Judges didn't stand for election, but they only carried out the will of those who did (the framers, or Congress).
2 Comments | Leave a comment
"I think the real objection living constitutionalists have to originalism is that it frustrates judges' wills to power."
Exactly. They want a living constitution so they can rewrite the meaning completely without going through the amendment process.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
If the Congress had done their job and removed judges regularly for violating the Constitution, i.e. interpreting/adding/subtracting clauses by impeachment maybe the judges would follow the law and stop using their predilections to control the people. The judiciary is doing its best to create a society that the elites want to have.
Again, the Constitution CREATES the supreme court and thus the supreme court has no authority to determine even the meaning of a single word. We the People through our States decide what the Constitution means because We the People through our States created the Constitution as law to bind Congress, the Executive, and the Courts.
If a subordinate has the authority to define the superior, then any one of us subject to a court order has the authority to redefine that order to mean what we want it to mean, any one of us has the authority to decide what our boss's job is. Tell your boss hiser job and let me know how you fare.