June 17
Article I - On the Preamble
Apparently neither “insuring domestic tranquility” nor “promoting the general welfare” were on the minds of the majority when the Supreme Court ruled (6-3) that the ban on bump stocks was unlawful. The four separate shootings on the weekend which followed the ruling, whether consequence or coincidence, further illlustrate the negative impact of the highest court’s repeated failure, or refusal, to act in the public interest by opening and promoting a constitutional path to the enactment of common sense gun regulation. The decades-long misinterpretation and misapplication of the Second Amendment is just one of a number of stains on the Court’s record and reputation, especially over the past thirty years. There is good reason to suspect that Alexander Hamilton may have been wrong when he says in Federalist 78 that the judiciary is the branch “...least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution....”, or that the judiciary is “...beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two....”. Recent history and current events indicate that We the People have good reason to be concerned about the dangers of both corruption and ideology and their influence on the judicial branch of government.
Article II - On the Constitution
It has been suggested that, from the beginning, the Supreme Court, in the person of Chief Justice John Marshall, may have arrogated to itself a role never intended for it by the Founders: that of determining the constitutionality of a law, or “judicial review”. One could argue, based on the historical record, that Justice Marshall simply asserted this authority even though, technically, he had no cause or constitutional sanction to do so. Article 3 of the Constitution itself makes no provision for the notion of judicial review. Article 3, Section 2, in fairly straightforward language, establishes the parameters for the Court’s “original” and “appellate” jurisdictions. In effect, the Supreme Court was to function simply as the court of last appeal in the event of disputes connected to laws duly passed by Congress and signed by the president.
An important takeaway from an examination of Article III, and the Constitution as a whole, is that, contrary to the view of some current justices, Congress certainly does have the power to regulate both the Supreme Court and the lower courts. Ultimately, We the People, through the Congress, have the responsibility to carefully and thoroughly study the backgrounds and philosophies of office-seekers to ensure, first, that voters are electing responsible and democratically inclined representatives, and, second, that these officers will safeguard democratic institutions by carefully vetting the legal philosophies, writings, and rulings of all nominees to positions of responsibility in the judicial system of the United States.
Next: Originalism