Debate : 25101


Off-Topic / Debate / 25101	25100 \| 25102

Subject:	Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Wed, 28 Jul 2004 04:39:32 GMT
Viewed:	2718 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Laswell wrote:

If a state declares it illegal, it’s illegal.

Unless the state declares something illegal that it is unconstitutional to so declare. For example, if a particular state prevented the right of free assembly or free association, that would be unconstitutional. The supremes might not rule on it on the first try, until someone brought a properly construed test case that they could not decide more narrowly, but lets not confuse defacto with dejure.

Wrong again. It is the judical branch’s right and responsibility to strike down any law which is unconstitutional.

Until such time as the Judiciary does strike it down,

Or a jury nullfies it.

you can be prosecuted and sentanced under that law.

Defacto, yes. It still may be unconstitutional though.

Doesn’t mean it’s necessarily constitutional or un, just that it may not yet have been found so.

Message has 2 Replies:

		Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
(...) A great example of this is currently in the offing, much to the (URL) disgust> of Justice O'Connor. The ruling may undo thousands of sentences because the methods by which those sentences were imposed has been identified as unconstitutional. (...) (20 years ago, 28-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

		Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
(...) You ripped that sentance totally out of context, and by doing so totally failed to add anything new or even contradictory to my original statement as a whole. Let's look at the key points of the original text: (...) I accidentally left a word (...) (20 years ago, 28-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
(...) Wrong, yourself. The Federal government has no right to make a law declaring same-sex marriage illegal. They can always make a constitutional amendment. Also, state governments don't need to be given specific permission to do something as long (...) (20 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

200 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search