1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
|
Government of men and not of laws
#################################
:date: 2016-02-19T08:14:51
:category: faith
:tags: blogComment, FirstThings, UnitedStates, constitution
And after the yesterday’s comment_ yet another opportunity to
say what I for long wanted to have here recorded. This one_
touches on another article_ on First Things:
.. _comment:
{filename}no-one-cares-about-ISIS.rst
.. _one:
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/firstthingsmag/getting_it_right_with_the_constitution_pete_spiliakos_first_things/#comment-2522288373
.. _article:
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2016/02/getting-it-right-with-the-constitution
“In the government of this Commonwealth, the legislative
department shall never exercise the executive and judicial
powers, or either of them: The executive shall never exercise the
legislative and judicial powers, or either of them: The judicial
shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or
either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not
of men.” [#]_
Which is to say, that on the one hand I completely agree with
`the previous comment`_, on the other hand, I am afraid that
horses of constitutionalism are for a long time away from the
barn. All talking about Constitutionalism seems to me to be
passé. Long long time ago American citizens (of which I am not a
one) decided through their representatives to ignore their
Constitution and the rule of law and embraced firmly the rule of
men.
.. _`the previous comment`:
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/firstthingsmag/getting_it_right_with_the_constitution_pete_spiliakos_first_things/#comment-2521170850
One obvious example out of many: when was the last time when the
national discussion about some issue lead to the only
constitutional result: new `Amendment to the Constitution`_? 24th
and 26th perhaps were important but more certified a change which
has already happened (20th, 22nd, 23rd, 25th and 27th seem to me
just like a bureaucratic triviality, although the history of 27th
amendment is awesome; 21st just repealed 18th) but I guess the
last amendments which truly changed the story of your
Constitution is 19th.
.. _`Amendment to the Constitution`:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Most huge changes in the constitution (with little "c") of the
United States happened outside of the expected legislative
process, mostly in the chambers of the Supreme Court. Brown v.
Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, Citizens United, Obergefell v.
Hodges, etc. were all change of the constitution which should be
matter of all-national discussion and legislative deliberation,
but it just didn't happen, because the Constitution is too
cumbersome for those for whom the goal sanctifies the means
(i.e., almost everybody).
So, I would be willing to say that since FDR (yes, him again) the
proper constitutional process was mostly ignored and the biggest
changes were done only by the non-elected group of men (and
women) of the Supreme Court, and in the last years even this
contempt of the legislative power was not enough and now laws are
just promulgated by the fiat of one man, the President of United
States, who has no business to make laws whatsoever.
.. [#] Yes, I know it is not about whole United States, just
about Massachusetts, but I always believed that the principle
was meant to apply to whole nation.
|
