tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817911217098974229.post5015992810995175840..comments2023-11-05T04:09:26.194-05:00Comments on e g r e g o r e s: The "Unconstitutional" CanardApuleius Platonicushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11761230673724504084noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817911217098974229.post-3527131757358725662011-01-06T20:38:51.771-05:002011-01-06T20:38:51.771-05:00Legal arguments one way or another are not canards...Legal arguments one way or another are not canards.<br /><br />It's when people argue, for example, that proponents of child labor laws are part of an evil conspiracy to destroy the Constitution, then it is a canard.Apuleius Platonicushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11761230673724504084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817911217098974229.post-63509868707207120682011-01-06T16:39:47.553-05:002011-01-06T16:39:47.553-05:00I'm honestly not sure how its a "canard.&...I'm honestly not sure how its a "canard." Developing the Constitutional basis for the kinds of laws you are talking about was honestly problematic. At the end of the day, the 13th and 14th amendments proved to be fairly serviceable, but since the question of "constitutionality" is developed within an ongoing interpretive framework, the issue is a legitimate one and one on which reasonable minds can surely differ, especially when dealing with issues on the cutting edge of developing law.<br /><br />What many people do not fully realize is that the New Deal ushered in/accompanied what was possibly the most radical philosophical upheaval in our legal system since the Constitution was ratified. The New Deal <i>was</i> unconstitutional, and so our legal conception of the Constitution changed to accomodate it.<br /><br />A law isn't consitutional just because we think its a good law. That's purposely not how the constitution works.Kullervohttp://byzantium.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com