Is the current admin (whitehouse) acting "in the spirit" of the Constitution?

Question

many judges must decide a case on the "spirit" of the law -

Some clever defendants may find an obscure loophole to free a guilty offender - but at times it's the "spirit" and intention of a law which is obvious -

Does turning one's back on the Constitution violate the "spirit of the law"?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/16/gore.constitution/index.html

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/

Answer 1

a retort on jaimes comment. abortion shouldn't be a federal issue but a states issue same applies with gay marriage. as far as taxes you might be taxed by your state or local govt, that is an issue that you need to blame upon your govt there and not the federal govt. As far as representation California gets the best representation. House of Representatives is set up by population, California has the most representatives since they have the most population out of any state. Representatives are the ones that pass bills regarding taxation, so if you have any problems with your taxes you should vote for people that meet that agenda instead of blaming it on not being represented, if anything people in states like vermont or maryland would be the ones that complain about not being represented. But to answer the question this administration, and most of the administrations in the 20th century grab the Constitution and throw in the garbage. Any welfare programs, education, abortion, creating agencies, income taxes, dividend taxes, and anything that the federal govt does that violates a states rights is pretty much unconstitutional. To the person that said we can't any longer heed to a 220 year old document, I guess we can just remove the senate, change the presidents term to a lifetime term give him all legislative and interpretative rights, and then lets also remove any form self defense from govt by limiting all arms sales and having martial law nationwide. I guess we should ignore the constitution so that we can do that. Thats the most utter rubbish I hear so often, if we aren't even going to limit the government why don't we just become communist or fascist state w/o a democratic process. Dangers? apparantly having nations that are stronger then you like the British Empire and the French empire weren't dangers?

Answer 2

No administration has acted in the spirit or the letter of the Constitution since Coolidge.

Answer 3

Seperation of church & state, taxation wihtout representation
those 2 key things are from I remember most on our Independance, yet the administration laughs at it by telling you whom u cant marry. Just the catholic/christian churches saying NO to gay marriage should be enough of a NO and for insurance reaons getting married by city hall or court or where ever should suffice. BUT they want it in writting across the board. And abortion, who are the GOV to say its your body, u need more permision for a tattooe then an abortion.
As for taxes, California pays through through the nose and we get NO representation. FAIRNESS< more like favoritism

Answer 4

Impossible to apply the "spirit" of a 220+Year old doucment from an era that had none of the dangers or crimes that we deal with today.

Answer 5

Well you have quoted a really good word, in connection with the whitehouse administration "ACTING".

Answer 6

It most certainly is despite what you neo-libs say.