Thursday, November 20, 2008

Article III

Now we set up the third branch of the government in Article III.
Section. 1.

The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section. 2.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section. 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

That is interesting; I didn't see a word in there that gives the courts the right to legislate from the bench...maybe I missed something...nope I didn't. I guess we'll just have to ignore all of that for now, at least until we can get the Constitution changed to allow legislation by court order. Oh well, what can you do? They are literally above the law. I included a picture this time, so no more complaining that this is all text! Kind of looks like a great and spacious building to me. Thanks for reading. Hope you learned something.

3 comments:

Jared Nowland said...

You forgot to put in the part of the courts having the power to interparate the will of the people if the people vote against the liberal agenda. Oh that may just be the courts in California that have this power.

Jared Nowland said...

http://www.chucktaylorasaa.com/index.htm

check out Chuck taylor or your second amendment poast.

C.D. Weber said...

Thanks for the link Jared. On your first post, that is exactly what I was trying to get at with all of the "legislation from the bench". We essentially have judges (usually liberal) interpreting laws, and overturning others, based on their biased perceptions. California, as you mentioned, is one of the prime examples of this; it started with Prop 22 being overturned, and the current amendment to the state constitution, Prop 8. I am interested to see how the state supreme court will react to this. I also fear that they may set a dangerous precedent if they decide to overturn this amendment. Because there is no real room for interpretation of this amendment, they must either uphold it as it stands, or go against the will of the people and overturn it. We will see what happens. Any bets on whether or not they will overturn it? I am thinking the people of California will get the short end of the stick on this one.