| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Heat is On. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 1 2006, 07:14 AM (154 Views) | |
| Jolly | Jun 1 2006, 07:14 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
To amend the Constitution to prohibit gay marriage. At least the heat is on down here. One Senator has already said he will vote for the amendment, while the other (Landreau) is being heavily lobbied to switch her vote to the affirmative. While it is doubtful that such amendment could be ratified, is there enough impetus within the country to possibly get the amendment out of the Senate? |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jun 1 2006, 07:21 AM Post #2 |
|
All just my opinion, I think you could get about 64 votes in the Senate (just barely not enough), and about the same % in the House. Even if it did get through congress, 3/4 of the states would need to approve it through their respective legislatures...which actually seems quite possible. So it would be close, possible, but controversial. I think gay marriage, like abortion, will never survive a federal piece of legislation banning or restricting it...so I say send it to the states, and then I'll choose where to live accordingly. |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Jun 1 2006, 07:23 AM Post #3 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Now that's a good question.....can SCOTUS strike down an amendment as unconstitutional? |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jun 1 2006, 07:35 AM Post #4 |
|
Yes, this IS interesting. Congress can always override SCOTUS, if needed though... It would be a pissing contest with congress having the last laugh: By a simple majority vote in both Houses, Congress under Article III, Section 2, can curtail the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction. In other words, Congress could by majority vote tell the court it may not rule, say, on abortion. This is the language of the Constitution: "The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and to fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make." What could be clearer? The writers of the Constitution did not intend to give the Supreme Court or the lower courts the power they have assumed almost from the beginning of the Republic. The Founding Fathers were concerned about a runaway judiciary. In fact, in the "Federalist Papers," Alexander Hamilton wrote that the powers of Congress provide "a complete security [against] the danger of judiciary encroachments on the legislative authority." Hamilton was anticipating the Supreme Court might become another legislature with this difference: its members have life tenure. Louis D. Brandeis, a liberal justice, in 1924 said the Supreme Court had converted judicial review into the power of "a super-legislature." Here is a list of other congressional powers over the Supreme Court as enacted by the Founding Fathers: (1) Congress decides on the appropriation for the judicial branch, including salaries. If Congress says no to a requested salary increase, there is nothing the court can do about it. (2) The president appoints the justices but they must be confirmed by the Senate. (3) Congress has the power to define the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts because the Constitution grants Congress the right "to ordain and establish such courts." Nowhere in the Constitution, directly or implicitly, are federal judges granted the right to manage schools, hospitals, prisons and other institutions. (4) The House may impeach and the Senate may try and remove federal judges right up to the Supreme Court. There is nothing the courts can do about it because neither the chief executive nor the Supreme Court can interfere with the impeachment powers of Congress. (5) Congress is empowered to decide how many Supreme Court justices there shall be. |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jun 1 2006, 08:46 AM Post #5 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Cool, the US version of the "notwithstanding clause". |
![]() |
|
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Register for Free |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |








12:35 AM Jul 11