Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
OK, then, it could be done as an amendment to the constitution, could it not? The constitution is not "set in stone" - it has been amended many times, and things that were prohibited have been re-permitted, eg the prohibition on alcohol.
|
Agreed, but the path is very difficult. First you have to get the Federal government to pass it with a 2/3 majority, then you have to get 3/4 of the states to pass a ratification (which says that they agree with the change) through their state governments. 10-15 years for a change, very public,and it can still be stopped short at any point in the process. The Equal Rights Amendment for women never made though the ratification process. That was the last attempt (in the early 1970's). Good luck getting a change for perpetual copyright. While under the British system, it's just a vote of parliment...
(Actually I stand corrected. An amendment first pass in 1789 was finally ratified in 1992. It controls how congressmen can vote for pay raises. That is number 27, the first 10 of which were added to the constitution in order to get it passed. 17 changes (one of which cancelled another) in 200+ years is pretty hard to change.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
But you're talking "theory", Ralph. Let's take a practical example: I believe that the US constitution explicitly prohibits detention without trial, and yet that is precisely what has been going on for the last few years at Guantanemo Bay. The military forces involved did not refuse to obey their orders on the grounds that they were unconstitutional, did they?
|
I don't want to get hung up on Guantanemo Bay. It would take a page to describe the legal finagling. Basically what do you do with unlawful combatants (spys, saboteurs, and the like). Traditionally, they were shot without trial....