British Mag: U.S. Constitution ‘Outdated, Malfunctioning Piece Of Junk’

[Slartibartfast]

I know, you've said that before. I've thought you might be "shooting the messenger".

I find Alex to be a bit annoying and histrionic myself, but I don't have any suspicions of "fake news" on that site. (BTW... I searched this story on the net and after seeing it on at least a dozen other sites, I stopped looking.)

He has no suspicions of "fake news" on Infowars.

Now lads, you know what you really want to say to him. What would you say to a flat Earther? Is being delusional a conservative trait now?

I have you blocked but I'm guessing as usual you will shy away from tacking someone on your 'team' though you know he is certifiable? The institutional grey brick behind him is quite fitting.

It is called moral cowardice. Enough said.

Blocking shiteater now.

 

[Tsing Tao]

He has no suspicions of "fake news" on Infowars.

Now lads, you know what you really want to say to him. What would you say to a flat Earther? Is being delusional a conservative trait now?

I have you blocked but I'm guessing as usual you will shy away from tacking someone on your 'team' though you know he is certifiable? The institutional grey brick behind him is quite fitting.

It is called moral cowardice. Enough said.

Blocking shiteater now.

Pretty soon you'll be comfortably in your shell of left wing only posters!

I know, post a screenshot of you seeing nothing after my post.

 

[gwb-trading]

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Here’s the kicker, often when the will of the people cannot make a change to the constitution because of the difficulties of the amendment process, we forfeit that power to the courts. Think about that.

Good point. The drafters of the Constitution actually foresaw that possibility and gave congress a way to fight back. Federal judges are subject to impeachment. More powerful still, Congress has express authority to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. For example, congress could pass a law taking all immigration issues away from the federal courts. The lower federal courts are not even required to exist. Congress could simply do away with the Ninth Circuit, for example.

 

[UsualName]

I think what you are saying is that when there is not sufficient will among the people to amend the constitution, liberal courts will usurp that power.

Liberal presidents too.

It works both ways. DC v Heller, namely.

 

[UsualName]

Good point. The drafters of the Constitution actually foresaw that possibility and gave congress a way to fight back. Federal judges are subject to impeachment. More powerful still, Congress has express authority to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. For example, congress could pass a law taking all immigration issues away from the federal courts. The lower federal courts are not even required to exist. Congress could simply do away with the Ninth Circuit, for example.

Immigration is a federal authority and the courts have the right to review all matters such, unless we amend the constitution accordingly.

My point is that there are upsides and down sides to a cumbersome amendment process and saying otherwise as the original article did doesn’t reflect the whole picture.

 

[Tom B]

DC v. Heller was decided correctly.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

It works both ways. DC v Heller, namely.

'splain

 

[UsualName]

'splain

DC v Heller is the product of right wing judicial activism. The federal government never guaranteed your right to own a firearm for personal use before. It changed the constitutional law without an amendment.

 

[RedDuke]

It should be difficult to amend the Constitution. However, it is not impossible. We have amended it 27 times.

Wow. Finally I can agree with every word you said. Feels kinda strange.