Infinite danger

Ratio juris- original intent
That the Constitution means what it was intended to mean when it was written
not all the possible interpretations that the lawyers have been able to come up with since.
There were copious debates and the details of what each part of it was to mean were hashed out in days-long debates.   We have the transcriptions.
Very clear what the authors were intending to convey.
Instead law schools don’t even teach consitutional law.
They teach case law, which means what did another previous court and jury decide.
Not what was originally meant.
The problem with that is the same problem that arises with gossip over time.
As each party passes on a little snippet of information, the information gets modified and eventually it is unrecognizeable as what it started out as.
The original idea gets mutated and warped.

Out of sight-out of mind becomes invisible idiot.

The Constitution means what it meant.
For a federal judge to come out and put their own spin on it to please the person who appointed them does not change what it meant.
It just means that we no longer have a federal government.

Instead we have something infinitely more dangerous…
a national government.


About drrik

3rd career and 2nd childhood. Spends spare time repairing old things. Aspires to burn more gasoline, gunpowder, and ink in pursuit of slowing down. Child of the 60s and aspiring student of history. No desire to see us repeat the failed social experiments that keep failing for lack of human beings that meet the left wing standards and have to be killed off. Did engineering long enough to realize that very little is new and the wheel does not need to be reinvented.
This entry was posted in constitutional and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Infinite danger

  1. thedrpete says:

    What you point out, Drik, is what in my latest post I identify as one of three internal battles we’re losing to the progressives: circumstantial judgment versus truisms.

  2. Mrs. AL says:

    Wish I could get every U.S. Citizen to read and comprehend this post. (You already know my pension for referring to the “national,” not “federal” government.)

    What is so doggoned significant here is your spot-on point that “case” law now supersedes “Constitutional” law. If we would just get people to hone in on this one issue … alas, most of our fellow citizens would rather just “go along” and the lawyers don’t WANT a focus on the Constitution and its predecessor, the Articles of Confederation, b/c then they would not be able to make as much money.

    • drrik says:

      Not totally sure, but I think that the national government mutation first broached my consciousness from one of your earlier posts on Townhall. I think that the big problem is that most folks are captiivated by the pervasive assumption of normalacy. This is the same inertia that caused folks evacuating the trade towers after a jetliner crashed into the floors above them, to turn back to their cubicles to go back and turn off their computers. While this is the most frustrating part of the current careenimg towards economic disaster, it is also a part of the human condition that has allowed us to survive more arduous catastrophes in the past.

      Just not sure what to do about it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s