Post by ShivaTD on Aug 7, 2013 11:23:25 GMT
In the past I've previously proposed and supported the following Constitutional Amendment that would pragmatically provide the maximum possible protections of our Inalienable Rights as well as limiting the scope of government to it's enumerated (contractual) roles and responsibilities.
While overwhelmingly most federal laws are Constitutional beyond dispute the only ones that are really in dispute are those that are founded originally upon a split Supreme Court decision. I don't believe that there should ever be any dispute related to the powers of the federal government in law or action and by imposing a requirement for unanimous consent it provides the maximum pragmatically possible limitation on the federal government.
I have a simple position in that any law or government action that is of questionable Constitutionality is a law we can live without. If even one Supreme Court Justice finds a flaw with the Constitutionality of any law or government action then we can live without that law or government action.
Constitutional Amendment:
The Supreme Court of the United States, in it's delegated role under
Article III Section 2, in determining the constitutionality of any law,
treaty or action of the Government under this Constitution shall
require the unanimous consent of all voting members on the Court. Any
law or action which fails to meet this criteria upon review shall be
unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court of the United States, in it's delegated role under
Article III Section 2, in determining the constitutionality of any law,
treaty or action of the Government under this Constitution shall
require the unanimous consent of all voting members on the Court. Any
law or action which fails to meet this criteria upon review shall be
unconstitutional.
While overwhelmingly most federal laws are Constitutional beyond dispute the only ones that are really in dispute are those that are founded originally upon a split Supreme Court decision. I don't believe that there should ever be any dispute related to the powers of the federal government in law or action and by imposing a requirement for unanimous consent it provides the maximum pragmatically possible limitation on the federal government.
I have a simple position in that any law or government action that is of questionable Constitutionality is a law we can live without. If even one Supreme Court Justice finds a flaw with the Constitutionality of any law or government action then we can live without that law or government action.