Common Good Constitutionalism
-
I'm still an originalist. Common Good is just monkeying around with the Constitution same as the Left loves to do, just with different goals.
-
I saw a quotation of Scalia's the other day. I may have the exact words incorrect, but the point stands.
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
@George-K said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
I saw a quotation of Scalia's the other day. I may have the exact words incorrect, but the point stands.
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
Yup. Probably my favorite justice ever.
“I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill
-
The cornerstone of Vermeule’s theory is the claim that “the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to ‘protect liberty’ as an end in itself” — or, in layman’s terms, that the Constitution empowers the government to pursue conservative political ends, even when those ends conflict with individual rights as most Americans understand them.
Full stop - No. How is this even up for debate amongst “conservatives”?
-
The cornerstone of Vermeule’s theory is the claim that “the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to ‘protect liberty’ as an end in itself” — or, in layman’s terms, that the Constitution empowers the government to pursue conservative political ends, even when those ends conflict with individual rights as most Americans understand them.
Full stop - No. How is this even up for debate amongst “conservatives”?
@LuFins-Dad said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
The cornerstone of Vermeule’s theory is the claim that “the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to ‘protect liberty’ as an end in itself” — or, in layman’s terms, that the Constitution empowers the government to pursue conservative political ends, even when those ends conflict with individual rights as most Americans understand them.
Full stop - No. How is this even up for debate amongst “conservatives”?
It sounds an awful lot like a bunch of guys who want to tell everybody else what’s good for them and they’ll put you in jail if you disagree.
Hey - why not have a uniform while you’re at it?
I was only joking
-
@George-K said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
I saw a quotation of Scalia's the other day. I may have the exact words incorrect, but the point stands.
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
Yup. Probably my favorite justice ever.
@Mik said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
@George-K said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
I saw a quotation of Scalia's the other day. I may have the exact words incorrect, but the point stands.
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
Yup. Probably my favorite justice ever.
Harlan FTW.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
The cornerstone of Vermeule’s theory is the claim that “the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to ‘protect liberty’ as an end in itself” — or, in layman’s terms, that the Constitution empowers the government to pursue conservative political ends, even when those ends conflict with individual rights as most Americans understand them.
Full stop - No. How is this even up for debate amongst “conservatives”?
It sounds an awful lot like a bunch of guys who want to tell everybody else what’s good for them and they’ll put you in jail if you disagree.
Hey - why not have a uniform while you’re at it?
@Doctor-Phibes said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
@LuFins-Dad said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
The cornerstone of Vermeule’s theory is the claim that “the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to ‘protect liberty’ as an end in itself” — or, in layman’s terms, that the Constitution empowers the government to pursue conservative political ends, even when those ends conflict with individual rights as most Americans understand them.
Full stop - No. How is this even up for debate amongst “conservatives”?
It sounds an awful lot like a bunch of guys who want to tell everybody else what’s good for them and they’ll put you in jail if you disagree.
Hey - why not have a uniform while you’re at it?
Sounds an awful lot like the flip side of liberal activist judges, doesn't it?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
@LuFins-Dad said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
The cornerstone of Vermeule’s theory is the claim that “the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to ‘protect liberty’ as an end in itself” — or, in layman’s terms, that the Constitution empowers the government to pursue conservative political ends, even when those ends conflict with individual rights as most Americans understand them.
Full stop - No. How is this even up for debate amongst “conservatives”?
It sounds an awful lot like a bunch of guys who want to tell everybody else what’s good for them and they’ll put you in jail if you disagree.
Hey - why not have a uniform while you’re at it?
Sounds an awful lot like the flip side of liberal activist judges, doesn't it?
@Mik said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
Sounds an awful lot like the flip side of liberal activist judges, doesn't it?
It actually sounds more like the hard left mindset to me. Banning things we don't approve of and taking away personal freedoms in order to "protect society" isn't a good idea.
-
I saw a quotation of Scalia's the other day. I may have the exact words incorrect, but the point stands.
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
@George-K said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
But even among the most conservative judges, the US constitution is still interpreted differently, depending on the time in history who is looking at it.
-
@George-K said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
But even among the most conservative judges, the US constitution is still interpreted differently, depending on the time in history who is looking at it.
@taiwan_girl said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
@George-K said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
But even among the most conservative judges, the US constitution is still interpreted differently, depending on the time in history who is looking at it.
Define differently.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
@George-K said in Common Good Constitutionalism:
"It's a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say."
But even among the most conservative judges, the US constitution is still interpreted differently, depending on the time in history who is looking at it.
Define differently.
1896 Plessey vs Ferguson (7-1 saying separate but equal was okay)
1954 Brown vs Board of Education (9-0 saying separate but equal was not okay)Basically the same argument. Separate but equal. Two opposite decisions.
