Panther
Gold Member
Offline
My Heart beats True for the Red White & Blue...
Posts: 11408
Gender: 
|
Bobby. wrote on Oct 28 th, 2017 at 2:10pm: Panther wrote on Oct 28 th, 2017 at 1:51pm: Bobby. wrote on Oct 28 th, 2017 at 1:48pm: How many 100s of other laws have they changed? Over 225+ years.......None........Zero.....
In over 225 years the Supreme Court of The United States never changed any Law.
Rubbish - they change laws all the time. The founding fathers of the United States wanted a flexible legal system that could change with changing times. They got it but we didn't - if Barnaby had come before the SCOTUS he would have got off and still had his job. Why - because that old law was stupid - Hypothetical: it would mean that President Putin could all of a sudden decide that
all Australian Citizens are now Russian citizens and our whole
parliament would collapse - that's how stupid that law is. I actually suggested that months ago if NK wanted to cause us grief, they could do just that.....Declare all Australians are here & now NK Citizens....
Quote:....The founding fathers of the United States wanted a flexible legal system that could change with changing times.....
Absolutely......they sure did & they provided for a process to secure that flexibility.....but it isn't very easy....not by a long shot.
The Law of the Land in America is the US Constitution.
The Founding Fathers.......The People......wrote the Law, the US Constitution, expressly for the People....not the government, who depend on the express continual consent of the American People in order to govern, which can be rescinded at any time by the People.
Knowing that this set of Laws they wrote were not perfect, they gave the People (not the government) a way to change any part of it, or add new law to it.......& that is via a Constitutional Amendment.
The ONLY way the US Constitution can be changed, the only way the Law of the Land can be changed, is by Amending it, & that power belongs to the People, for they must approve of, & ratify, any Amendment.
The process been attempted thousands of times, but only 17 Amendments have ever gone through the process & been successful (not counting the first 10 amendments, which were actually a Bill of Rights).
Now, All US Laws must be based on the Constitution itself, if they are not they can be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court only rules on Constitutionality, & it never creates or changes existing Constitutional Law.
Would Barnaby Joyce have made it through the Supreme Court intact?
It would depend on how the Supreme Court would 'interpret' the Constitutional Law affecting him......but based on what I know, I seriously doubt they would have upheld his position.
JFYI.....there is no dual-citizenship disqualification I know of, or am aware of, in the US Constitution.
Nope, they would probably need to change that law, which IMHO is way too ambiguous (like most of the Australian Constitution), & Barnaby would probably still be out of luck.....
On a personal note I cant believe, for the life of me, IMHO, I can't believe the original intent of this law was to protect Australia from this kind of Dual-Citizenship. There is no conflict of interests, if the Citizenship holder has no knowledge of it, & was a natural born Australian Citizen himself, & has no interest in New Zealand that he could affect.
|
Forum
Pages: 
American Supreme Court is better .... (Read 17732 times)
