alfreda89: 3 foot concrete Medieval style gargoyle with author's hand resting on its head. (Spring in Austin)
alfreda89 ([personal profile] alfreda89) wrote2005-04-15 12:24 am

Mr. DeLay, may I introduce Mr. Hamilton?

***
"Mr. DeLay, may I introduce Mr. Hamilton?"

"If it be said that the legislative body are themselves the constitutional judges of their own powers, and that the construction they put upon them is conclusive upon the other departments, it may be answered, that this cannot be the natural presumption, where it is not to be collected from any particular provisions in the Constitution. It is not otherwise to be supposed, that the Constitution could intend to enable the representatives of the people to substitute their will to that of their constituents. It is far more rational to suppose, that the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.

Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws, rather than by those which are not fundamental.

---Alexander Hamilton in Federalist #78:

(Emphasis mine)

[identity profile] kateelliott.livejournal.com 2005-04-15 08:39 am (UTC)(link)
Thanks for posting that.

[identity profile] alfreda89.livejournal.com 2005-04-15 02:56 pm (UTC)(link)
It can't be said enough. I noticed that Mark AR Kleiman had posted a large chunk from the papers, and I thought, how small can I *not* hide behind a cut and still post?

If the theocrats are taking over, they will get me mailing letters and knocking on doors until the last minute.

[identity profile] jacardie.livejournal.com 2005-04-15 09:33 pm (UTC)(link)
My dad's about as conservative as you can get and even he thinks DeLay is wack-job.

[identity profile] noiseinmyhead.livejournal.com 2005-04-15 11:47 pm (UTC)(link)
may I lift it wholesale????

[identity profile] alfreda89.livejournal.com 2005-04-16 12:03 am (UTC)(link)
Unfortunately, your dad probably won't bother to call his rep and say that, will he? My dad won't bother. I think DeLay is a little wobbly, but he's as hard to kill as those cockroaches he used to spray--I keep hoping one of the conservative think tanks will offer him a job. I wonder if he's poisoned that opportunity by aligning with the religious fringe? 8^)

[identity profile] alfreda89.livejournal.com 2005-04-16 12:05 am (UTC)(link)
You may, indeed. And look for Mr. Madison to be commenting soon, too...