Gautam wrote:

--- "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 05:18 PM 2/23/2004 -0600 Robert Seeberger wrote:
>But, and correct me if I am wrong here, aren't the
three branches of
>the FedGov supposed to be relatively equal in
overall power?

Ummmm....... No.    That was never envisioned at all
by the Founding
Fathers as near as I can tell.   I think that you
are mistaking "a system
of checks and balances" for "relatively equal
power."    Suffice to say, it
was not intended for the judiciary to be writing the
law as if it had the
democratic legitimacy of a Legislature.

JDG

Actually, John, I think you're both wrong :-) While the judiciary was probably meant to be the weakest branch - the "least dangerous branch" - was, I think, the phrase - it wasn't by much. The point is that each of the three has _different_ powers, which act as a check upon each other. It's the difference in the nature of their powers that is crucial. The problem with Rehnquist is that he has aggressively usurped executive and (even more) legislative powers, arrogating them to the Court system.

In any case I don't believe it was any court that wrote this:


Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


-- Doug _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to