Presumed Ignorant

In 1938 under United States v. Carolene Products, the Supreme Court institutionalized a judicial doctrine that federal legislation was presumed to be constitutional.

While the court is right to rein in extra-constitutional constructions of legislation (judicial activism), that presumption of constitutionality, in itself, is an extra-constitutional judicial construction, and is an abdication of the court's role to ‘check' unconstitutional laws. Carolene Products therefore helped advance the end of limited, constitutional government.

Thanks largely to reporting (remember that concept?) by CNSNews and a few other sources, we now better see the Supreme Court's opinion of Congress' grasp of what is constitutional is vastly overrated.

When asked where in the Constitution Congress is authorized to mandate health insurance for individuals, those favoring such legislation sound like babbling morons.  See:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55971


http://www.the912project.com/2009/11/12/where-does-constitution-say-congress-can-force-health-insurance-on-you-2/


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/57024


http://cnsnews.com/news/article/57007


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/57085


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56629


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55910


(After seeing these responses a second time, my apologies to those who babble and morons.)

Read Bob Barr's assertion that constitutional ignorance reigns supreme in Congress.

With laws passed but not read, and such congressional constitutional ignorance, one's left to conclude the courts' presumption of legislative constitutionality is more dangerous than credible.
In 1938 under United States v. Carolene Products, the Supreme Court institutionalized a judicial doctrine that federal legislation was presumed to be constitutional.

While the court is right to rein in extra-constitutional constructions of legislation (judicial activism), that presumption of constitutionality, in itself, is an extra-constitutional judicial construction, and is an abdication of the court's role to ‘check' unconstitutional laws. Carolene Products therefore helped advance the end of limited, constitutional government.

Thanks largely to reporting (remember that concept?) by CNSNews and a few other sources, we now better see the Supreme Court's opinion of Congress' grasp of what is constitutional is vastly overrated.

When asked where in the Constitution Congress is authorized to mandate health insurance for individuals, those favoring such legislation sound like babbling morons.  See:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55971


http://www.the912project.com/2009/11/12/where-does-constitution-say-congress-can-force-health-insurance-on-you-2/


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/57024


http://cnsnews.com/news/article/57007


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/57085


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56629


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55910


(After seeing these responses a second time, my apologies to those who babble and morons.)

Read Bob Barr's assertion that constitutional ignorance reigns supreme in Congress.

With laws passed but not read, and such congressional constitutional ignorance, one's left to conclude the courts' presumption of legislative constitutionality is more dangerous than credible.