Uncle Emanuel Watkins
05-21-2011, 05:50 PM
Another writ by Uncle Emanuel Watkins.
An example of how interpretation is meant to be always changing and fluid in matters concerning the U.S. Constitution is how power is expressed today by the judicial branch of the U.S. Supreme Court. As that particular branch of power started off without knowing what was intended of it, my argument is that the Supreme Court today is exercizing its power irresponsibility in regards to the people's best interest. As the legislative branch of the U.S. Congress has to be the most powerful branch in regards to what should be deemed constitutional or not, the Supreme Court's functioning ruling over those questions is in contempt of the people and their Civil Purpose.
Rather than the Supreme Court judge the issue of constitutionality, the U.S. House of Representatives should be handling that responsibility.
Like all power, the powers of the U.S. Constitution were left dynamic and fluid for the sake of the people and their Civil Purpose which means the U.S. Supreme Court should be sitting in judgment of whether each representative of the House and each senator of the Senate are representing properly the people of their districts and their states respectively. Any internal systems determined by the House and Senate are a conflict of interest and should be deemed against the Civil Purpose of the people. So, ultimately, the system of the House and the Senate should be determined based on what is in the best interests of the people in regards to whether their internal organizations and functions violate the people's Civil Purpose.
In other words, The U.S. Constitution is left intentionally fluid in regards to the people's Civil Purpose with this being what is in the best interests of the disadvantaged.
An example of how interpretation is meant to be always changing and fluid in matters concerning the U.S. Constitution is how power is expressed today by the judicial branch of the U.S. Supreme Court. As that particular branch of power started off without knowing what was intended of it, my argument is that the Supreme Court today is exercizing its power irresponsibility in regards to the people's best interest. As the legislative branch of the U.S. Congress has to be the most powerful branch in regards to what should be deemed constitutional or not, the Supreme Court's functioning ruling over those questions is in contempt of the people and their Civil Purpose.
Rather than the Supreme Court judge the issue of constitutionality, the U.S. House of Representatives should be handling that responsibility.
Like all power, the powers of the U.S. Constitution were left dynamic and fluid for the sake of the people and their Civil Purpose which means the U.S. Supreme Court should be sitting in judgment of whether each representative of the House and each senator of the Senate are representing properly the people of their districts and their states respectively. Any internal systems determined by the House and Senate are a conflict of interest and should be deemed against the Civil Purpose of the people. So, ultimately, the system of the House and the Senate should be determined based on what is in the best interests of the people in regards to whether their internal organizations and functions violate the people's Civil Purpose.
In other words, The U.S. Constitution is left intentionally fluid in regards to the people's Civil Purpose with this being what is in the best interests of the disadvantaged.