English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

what did justice oliver holmes mean when he said that "i do not think the u.s. would come to an end if we lost our power to declare an act of congress void. i do think the union would be imperiled if we could not make the declaration as to the laws of the several states.

2007-02-15 11:06:43 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

5 answers

First you must know a little about the man - He was a Union Officer in the War for Southern Independence. This speech was given I believe at Harvard around 1913. He trusted the congress to make wise decisions. Having been an officer for his Government. Having been in a war with the States he had less faith in the States to make these same wise decisions. He was mindful of possible conditions that could cause States to make laws contrary to what he fought to prevent and what may have been contrary to the Constitution. so just guessing I believe he thought there should be a watchful eye on the States to prevent another war or to prevent abuses of its citizens within the States .

2007-02-15 11:46:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

He is probably referring to the balance of power. Just as the President doesn't have the power to do solely as he likes neither does Congress or the Judicial branch. Each must answer to the other two. When all three agree on a law it is probably a good one. If Congress passes a law that is unconstitutional and it is signed by the President the Supreme Court may declare the law unconstitutional meaning it is not legal under the supreme law of the land, the Constitution. It doesn't happen often but it does happen. Most things brought before the Supreme Court are from lower levels of government and courts.

2007-02-15 19:20:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Justice Holmes was asserting the power of judicial review. His statement means that the Supreme Court has the power to declare acts of both the executive branch (the President and his cabinet) and the legislative branch (Congress) can be declared unConstitutional or exceeding the scope of their powers. What is very interesting about the quote is that it negates (in my opinion) the view that we have 3 separate but EQUAL branches of government. A good argument could be made that the Supreme Court is more powerful than the 2 other branches.

2007-02-15 19:13:34 · answer #3 · answered by David M 7 · 0 0

The United States will not be endangered as a country when a law passed by Congress is not repealed. The states must be allowed to make their own laws and the Union can still exist.

2007-02-15 19:20:44 · answer #4 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0 0

I think he meant that the U.S would not lose power because of denying a bill but the worker's union would be in danger if the law wasn't in several states.

2007-02-15 19:12:19 · answer #5 · answered by sali_mwana 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers