Quote:
Originally Posted by Renatus
I'm a bit confused though, sure judges are supposed to uphold the constitution and stop unjust laws. But usually those laws are passed by representatives, not through a direct vote by the people. The constitution is supposed to serve the people, and in this case, as right as it may be, it is being used to defy the will of most of the people.
Can somone explain this one to me? because frankly there arnt many examples of the constitution being used to take down a law that was voted in directly by the people that I can think of.
|
Saya says it well. The Constitution is not about protecting the tyranny of the majority, it is about protecting the individual. As difficult as it is for some to accept, California's legal system, which allows something like this challenge to both state legislation and a previous CA justice system ruling, to be overturned by a popular vote, is intrinsically flawed. In instances such as this, the Constitution of the United States, which protects individual freedom, is the supreme authority over states.
We are a democracy only in the sense that we elect our representatives by majority vote. In reality, the United States is ultimately a Constitutional Republic ruled and governed by law, not the majority of the people.