Mr. Choate, an important message from Justice , Scalia....
Jim Choate
ravage at einstein.ssz.com
Wed Mar 14 19:13:38 PST 2001
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Aimee Farr wrote:
> Yes. Indeed, it is the province of the Courts to interpret the Constitution
> (according to some, not including Mr. Choate),
Where?
It says "...under this Constitution...".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article III.
Section. 1.
[SSZ: text deleted]
Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity,
arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States,
and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their
Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public
Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime
Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall
be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--
between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens
of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming
Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or
the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
[SSZ: Text deleted]
> political appointees. The very fact that we ask the executive branch these
> questions is pause for thought. I was trying to uncover any pragmatic
> distinction between a "political view" versus an opinion on the mechanics of
> constitutional interpretation. I raised more questions than I answered.
____________________________________________________________________
If the law is based on precedence, why is the Constitution
not the final precedence since it's the primary authority?
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate
Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com
www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087
-====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
--------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy
mailing list