Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 198 posts

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#81

Post by gassit »

rayiner wrote: post #70
resoluteteeth wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If interpreted strictly, the constitution is really not suitable for operating a modern government (e.g. if you interpret the list of powers given to the federal government narrowly) so the supreme court essentially has no choice but to make stuff up. Obviously once they start doing that there's no real way to control what they are able to modify, but the only real way to fix it would be to completely scrap the curre…

> If interpreted strictly, the constitution is really not suitable for operating a modern government (e.g. if you interpret the list of powers given to the federal government narrowly) so the supreme court essentially has no choice but to make stuff up. One, that’s not quite true. Sometimes the Constitution uses broad language. For example, the Commerce Clause is worded expansively. It’s probably been pushed a bit be…

I would be interested in reading some detail of the "wall of separation" of church and state being something that the Supreme Court made up. It seems quite self evident from the text of the First Amendment. And the quote seems to come directly from Jefferson?

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#83

Post by Causality1 »

minikites wrote: post #67
Causality1 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The gay marriage issue is a great example of exactly the opposite of your point. States one by one recognizing gay marriage and proving that it wasn't going to cause the collapse of society is the only reason it was recognized on a national level. The same process is currently happening with marijuana prohibition.

>States one by one recognizing gay marriage and proving that it wasn't going to cause the collapse of society is the only reason it was recognized on a national level. You're leaving out the massive fights from states that did not want to recognize gay marriage, which could have easily gone the other way. The same process will repeat with marijuana prohibition and the states fighting it may succeed this time. What wo…

Why do you think the federal government is going to make smarter decisions than the average state government? I don't want to roll the dice on the feds making the right call every time. When the government makes a bad call I want the option of leaving and going somewhere less dumb. That's not an option if the dumbassery comes from Washington. It was federal overreach that made DOMA possible in the first place, as well as marijuana prohibition.

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#84

Post by [deleted] »

ByteJockey wrote: post #8
jessaustin wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Supreme Court has been making shit up since 1857 at the latest. They are likely to continue to make shit up for several years after the Union dissolves.

1803 at least. They made up their own right to strike down laws (Marbury v. Madison). Admittedly, I'm not sure what a supreme court does if they can't do that, but it's kinda funny that they bootstrapped it themselves.

[deleted]

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#85

Post by minikites »

Causality1 wrote: post #83
minikites wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>States one by one recognizing gay marriage and proving that it wasn't going to cause the collapse of society is the only reason it was recognized on a national level. You're leaving out the massive fights from states that did not want to recognize gay marriage, which could have easily gone the other way. The same process will repeat with marijuana prohibition and the states fighting it may succeed this time. What wo…

Why do you think the federal government is going to make smarter decisions than the average state government? I don't want to roll the dice on the feds making the right call every time. When the government makes a bad call I want the option of leaving and going somewhere less dumb. That's not an option if the dumbassery comes from Washington. It was federal overreach that made DOMA possible in the first place, as wel…

>When the government makes a bad call I want the option of leaving and going somewhere less dumb.

This is only an option for the most privileged among us. What are the options for someone who is gay and doesn't have the means to move to a less bigoted state?

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#86

Post by Causality1 »

minikites wrote: post #85
Causality1 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the federal government is going to make smarter decisions than the average state government? I don't want to roll the dice on the feds making the right call every time. When the government makes a bad call I want the option of leaving and going somewhere less dumb. That's not an option if the dumbassery comes from Washington. It was federal overreach that made DOMA possible in the first place, as wel…

>When the government makes a bad call I want the option of leaving and going somewhere less dumb. This is only an option for the most privileged among us. What are the options for someone who is gay and doesn't have the means to move to a less bigoted state?

Far greater than the options of someone who is gay and would have to move to a different country instead of just a different state. For example, the existence of sanctuary cities for undocumented immigrants is entirely dependent on a lack of federal power to override the will of the states.

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#87

Post by pyuser583 »

minikites wrote: post #65
victor106 wrote: post #41

> In 1995, he realized Mississippi had never ratified the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery. So he pushed that state's Legislature to do it — and it worked. Just think about that for a second: Someone had to push the state legislature to abolish slavery in 1995. Just sickening

Slavery was never really abolished, it's still allowed as punishment for a crime. The bias of police and the criminal justice system against people of certain races takes on a new meaning in this light.

No … slavery is/was the reduction of humans to commodities. Even a convicted prisoner can’t be sold.

There’s an exception in the 13th for convicts, but the results are very different from chattel slavery.

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#88

Post by wanderingmind »

jawns wrote: post #2

There have been only two amendments to the U.S. Constitution over the past 50+ years (one of which is the subject of this story). Why? Partly because the Supreme Court has been very willing to discover hidden rights within the existing amendments, decreasing the need for states to go through the very arduous process of getting a new amendment over the finish line. That might seem like a fine way to handle things ...…

This is an age old debate between judicial activism and judicial originalism. Most issues seem to stem from interpretation of the text.

Activist wing thinks it needs to be interpreted within the current framework of judicial, social and political viewpoints while originalism wants it to be interpreted in the way it was originally written. It's hard to say one way or another.

Activits would claim Brown vs Board created the march to racial equality, while originalist would say passing of Civil Rights Law is the appropriate way. It's a debate that is not going away anytime soon.

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#89

Post by BeFlatXIII »

fallingknife wrote: post #27
resoluteteeth wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If interpreted strictly, the constitution is really not suitable for operating a modern government (e.g. if you interpret the list of powers given to the federal government narrowly) so the supreme court essentially has no choice but to make stuff up. Obviously once they start doing that there's no real way to control what they are able to modify, but the only real way to fix it would be to completely scrap the curre…

Letting the states make their own decisions on issues not addressed by the constitution is a perfectly viable solution. Not sure why that would be particularly difficult.

It’s too easy for citizens to move between states. You no longer need to cross the Atlantic in a Conestoga wagon. This freedom of movement punishes states that attempt to increase their quality of life too far above the national average far more than it punishes low-quality states with brain drain.

Re: A bad grade that changed the U.S. constitution (2017)

#90

Post by BeFlatXIII »

shadowgovt wrote: post #45
fallingknife wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Letting the states make their own decisions on issues not addressed by the constitution is a perfectly viable solution. Not sure why that would be particularly difficult.

The history of the US has been a history of power centralization for good reason, unfortunately. The experiment of decentralized state level authority has been found wanting to the tune of a civil war and a Great depression, both of which were addressed by centralizing federal power.

How did a lack of federal power cause the Great Depression? I can see how it took a strong Federal government to do that the states could not to end the Depression, but not how that lack of power was a cause of getting into that specific mess.
Post reply on HN