Skip to main content

View Diary: Dusting off "Inherent Contempt" (282 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This is the THIRD time you are posting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Focher

    these quotes.  Quantity does not become quality.

    That Congress can declare President and the Supreme Court in rebellion does not need that they can legitimately access internal court files.

    Much like the fact that we can execute someone does not mean that we can torture them.  A greater power does not always include the lesser.

    •  Congress has the power to make all laws (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eyeswideopen

      which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

      You don't seem to gather just how powerful the use of an absolute like all in regards to power can be.

      They have the power to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions, so since they can declare war and or issue letters of Marque and or supress insurrection because all that is included in their powers under the Constitution, and they can make the rules for war, they can make it one of the rules to seize both persons and anything that may provide intelligence.

      The 109th Congress has in fact written legislation permitting warantless surveillence and seisures, kidnapping, torture, murder and holding without rendition, and many other perversions of the law which the 110th Congress intends to repeal.

      Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

      by rktect on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 04:16:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, but obviously they cannot (0+ / 0-)

        pass uncosntitutional laws.  They can't pass a law saying from now on President does not get to appoint judges and Ambassadors because it is necessary for something or other.  Just like they cannot pass laws assigning judicial power to themselves.  nor can they pass laws that encroach on other branches' constitutional prerogatives.

        •  They can indeed pass unconstitutional laws (0+ / 0-)

          The 109th Congress did so repeatedly. The Supreme Court may or may not choose to decide they are unconstitutional.

          If they do not find them unconstitutional the 110th Congress may find that to be such an egrarious example of partisan behhavior as opposed to good behavior that they need to be removed from office.

          Once removed from office a new Supreme Court might be appointed and reverse the earlier ruling.

          The Congress can Impeach the President, impeach judges and ambassadors.

          As to judicial powers The Congress has sole legislative powers in the District of Columbia and the Constitutional power to establish tribunals for which they make the rules. These rules may or may not be the same as for other inferior courts.

          Basically there is no limit on their power. The Supreme Court, inferior courts, the president and the whole of the government all have to take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the laws they make.

          Article III
          Section 1. 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 judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

          Section 2. 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;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

          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.

          The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.

          Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

          The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

          Other branches don't have Constitutional perogatives outside the Constitution and the laws of the United States which Congress wrote as the representative of We the People.

          To say otherwise is like saying the owners of a house can't hire an architect and empower him to draft up plans and specs and expect the contractor to adhere to them scrupulously.

          Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

          by rktect on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 05:40:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ok, then by your logic everyone must (0+ / 0-)

            obey the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc.  And the Supreme Court should not dare to strike them down.  I also look forward to your defense of Partial Birth Abortion Act.

            And, oh, so much for your vaunted checks and balances.  Last time we had a legislative Assembly behave in such a way as you propose we had ourselves a nice little revolution.

            Again, you are missing the fundamental point.  Congress can remove judges and abolish courts.  What it cannot do is once such courts exist pry into their internal deliberations.  Nor can it arrogate to itself judicial power contrary to Article III or Executive Power contrary to Article II.

            •  The checks and balances on the Supreme Court (0+ / 0-)

              are the laws and powers of the all powerful Congress which can take everything from them and replace it with the will of the people whom the represent.

              Ok, then by your logic everyone must obey the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc.  

              So long as they are laws that is correct

              And the Supreme Court should not dare to strike them down.  I also look forward to your defense of Partial Birth Abortion Act.

              The Supreme Court can strike them down, and be struck down itself if its behavior be not good.

              And, oh, so much for your vaunted checks and balances.  Last time we had a legislative Assembly behave in such a way as you propose we had ourselves a nice little revolution.

              "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

              Thomas Jefferson

              Again, you are missing the fundamental point.  Congress can remove judges and abolish courts.  What it cannot do is once such courts exist pry into their internal deliberations.  Nor can it arrogate to itself judicial power contrary to Article III or Executive Power contrary to Article II.

              Congress has not just the power but the obligation to ensure that anything it makes laws for, raises taxes for and spends money on, is accomplished according to its plans.

              Congress has the power

              To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

              To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

              To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

              To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

              To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

              Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

              by rktect on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 06:36:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  But it cannot breach separation of powers (0+ / 0-)

                And therefore it cannot inquire into the internal workings of the courts.

                •  Separation of powers is not (0+ / 0-)

                  written into the Constitution.

                  Congress has the power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

                  Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

                  by rktect on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 07:04:25 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Separation of powers IS written into the (0+ / 0-)

                    Constitution.

                    It says that Legislative power is vested in Congress, executive in the President, and judicial in the courts.  Unlike the British system.  Learn to read.

                    •  The Constitution does not say (0+ / 0-)

                      that Legislative power is vested in Congress, executive in the President, and judicial in the courts

                      It says all laws and all power are vested in Congress.

                      The President has to take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

                      He is responsible to futhfill that obligation. Since Congress wrote the Constitution, got it ratified and makes the laws, he does what Congress tells him to do.

                      Likewise with the courts, their role is to tell people to do what Congress has been empowered by the Constitution to tell them to do.

                      Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

                      by rktect on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 03:48:18 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  Oh, and weren't you bemoaning (0+ / 0-)

            "threats to 'judicial independence'" when people mentioned impeaching judges over the decisions that they make?

            •  No. (0+ / 0-)

              I'm all for impeaching judges when their behavior is not good.

              When justices of the Supreme Court come to Congress asking for a raise in salaries on the grounds they can't get good people without paying them a competitive wage, I would consider that evidence of their lacking both a strong moral compass and good judgement.

              Nobody wants judges whose decisions can be affected by how much money they are offered.

              I would suggest all judges like that be impeached.

              The better solution is clearly a maximum wage linked to the minimum wage, so that no lawyers can make more than say ten times the minimum wage.

              Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

              by rktect on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 06:58:24 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That is ridiculous (0+ / 0-)

                I make what the market pays.  If the client is willing to pay $250-280 an hour for my time, then that is what I am worth.  not to mention lawyers who work for contingency.

                •  Not if Congress passes a maximum wage law (0+ / 0-)

                  tied to the minimum wage law, with provisions that no contract shall allow hourly compensation above that rate.

                  There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents them from doing that and then that will be what the market pays. It might be a better or at least more humane solution than taking Dick's advice to Jack.

                  Next comes land reform. A bill to penalize all the corporations that engaged in war profiteering by taking their assets and distributing them to We the People in the form of public lands would help undo some of the environmental and political damage

                  Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

                  by rktect on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 03:53:51 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  So you are for impeaching judges (0+ / 0-)

                who struck down the Pledge and partial Birth Abortion Acts?

                •  I'm for impeaching judges (0+ / 0-)

                  who lack a strong moral compass, good judgement and would give custody of an infant nation to those who would divide it by the sword to control it

                  Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

                  by rktect on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 07:13:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  And that means what? (0+ / 0-)

                    Are you or are you not for impeaching judges who make decisions withwhich you simply disagree?  And if so, would you be perfectly alright when judges who uphold abortion rights are impeached?

                    •  It means I'm for impeaching judges (0+ / 0-)

                      who lack a strong moral compass, good judgement and would give custody of an infant nation to those who would divide it by the sword to control it.

                      I'm for impeaching judges who violate their oaths to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

                      I'm for impeaching judges whose decision making process can be influenced by money.

                      Abortion rights are not germane to any of those issues, but if they can't maintain good behavior and allow themselves to be influenced by ideas promulgated by groups other than the guys who wrote the Constitution and the laws of the United States then impeachment isn't enough, I'm for investigation and indictment.

                      Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

                      by rktect on Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 07:39:41 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Oh, so you are against citing foreign law (0+ / 0-)

                        and "evolving Constitution?"

                        Since neither of those are "ideas promulgated by groups other than the guys who wrote the Constitution and the laws of the United States."

                        Good to know.

                        •  I'm not against citing foreign law (0+ / 0-)

                          and as for an evolving Constitution, I'm happy to cite precedent back all the way to Moses and Hamurrappi.

                          That precedent changes and evolves over time but some parts of it such as the sovreignity of the written law over the divine rights of kings goes back to the middle bronze age.

                          Our Constitution ratified by the last of the original 13 colonies on May 29th 1790, had ratified Ten Ammendments  to it by December 15, 1791.

                          Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

                          by rktect on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 04:06:55 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  Oh, and which judge's decision (0+ / 0-)

                        is influenced by money?!  Name one.  Not which person decides whether to become a judge because of money, but show me a person who would have ruled differently because of money.

                        •  The Supreme Court recently complained to Congress (0+ / 0-)

                          that it needed a raise in its salaries because it couldn't attract good justices if they could make more money in the private sector.

                          Allowing we should accept the sworn testimony of Supreme Court Justices as their sincere opinion until proved otherwise...

                          If the decision as to whether or not to accept employment as a Supreme Court Justice or law clerk can be influenced by a little money, why should we not expect that more important decision would be even more likely to be influenced by a lot of money?

                          At that point we are no longer arguing about what they are, just how much they cost...

                          Any idea how many lawyers and judges have been impeached or disbarred for such improprieties as accepting bribes and kickbacks,and then lying to Congress about them?

                          Live Free or Die --- Investigate, Incarcerate

                          by rktect on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 04:15:13 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Ummm, that is a giant leap (0+ / 0-)

                            I can decide whether or not to take a job based on what it pays.  but it does not follow that once I take it (regardless of what it pays) I won't do my very best.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site