Living Constitution Argument

[pistos]

     [2] Jack m. Balkin, “Alive and Kicking: Why no one truly believes in a dead Constitution,” Slate, August 29, 2005,  http://www.slate.com/id/2125226/.

     [3] Jackson, R. H.  The Supreme Court in the American System of Government, Judges on Judging:  Views from the Bench, ed. David M. O’Brien, 20. (WashingtonD.C.: CQ Press, 2004).

     [4]

Comments

[sir_dave]

Interesting, though your vocabulary exceeds mine

[pistos]

Ya'll have so many terms for the country, it's really confusing for Americans to decide which should be used where. I'll use UK in the future.

We've spent some time comparing our to judiciary systems, and I can't say I like the idea of the "unwritten constitution." What's good today, is gone tomorrow, and back next week. Egads! One might as well claim you have no rights.

I think the issue of judicial legislation is split right down the liberal/conservative side. For those who consider the implications, it's a very hot debate.

We've had some pretty bad interpretations of the Constitution during our nation's short life. Some made by the Court, and later overturned. Since the 60s, however, it feels as if the Court's only interest is imposing the minority's will on the majority. Foolishly, I believe there are enough checks and balances to keep the Court from grabbing absolute power. We'll see...

[sir_dave]

It appears to me that there would be no legal remedy other than changing the very constitution that the Supreme Court adjudicates on, in some way explicitly making it impossible for the court to play with the democratically made decisions of the legislature