I just see it getting worse unfortunately! The farther to either side of the Political spectrum a President is, the more extreme his appointments will be. With no balance in the Congress, a President is able to appoint which ever ideological loons he wishes. Notice I used President and not any specific names. Most cases are decided among party lines now, which sheds bad light on all the justices.

Ok I will try. Of the 9 present supreme court judges all were appointed by Republican presidents except for two. Chances are Obama will get to appoint 4 maybe five Supreme Court Judges during his 4 year term. One of these guy is 88 and 4 others are over 70. The average age is 68. Even though the Senate will have to approve appointments of Judges the appointments will go through since the new Senate has a Democrat majority. I have a hard time believing that any judges appointed will not be very liberal in their views.

Do you agree with me that the Supreme Court was intended to be the least powerful branch of government? I think the government should be handed back to the states....the Federalists way.

How did we get here? Marbury vs. Madison (1803. It formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution.

Yes, but this case was more about the presumed right of the Court to lecture elected officials. Perhaps that was the beginning of the unraveling of it (and what a great answer!!!! nowwhereman, by the way). But, I believe that too many times the court uses what's popular in society rather than the very words of the constitution.

Now this subject is a little too deep. I would need to go back to school because a lot of this I have forgotten.

Scargo I believe you are correct because our constitution (orgional) has been modified if you will as our society has moved forward in the modern world. You are seeing sometimes it is far more benifical if we would go back to the basics.
Oh and yes nowherman you have a point..once the judicial system began to excercise their rights(power) our system began to change and so goes the constitution to where we are today.
I have read the up comming commander and chief probably will appoint 2 supreme court judges.
We will have to see..

While we're at it how about the fact we've been involved in two Middle East wars, two Asian wars and numerous conflicts in South America, Africa & Eastern Europe without ever declaring war. For all you war-supporters, isn't that against the Constitution also?

What about no-knock warrants? Or "sneak-n-peak" warrants?
What about American citizens being held as prisoners without indictment? Or being given a speedy trial?
What about bailing out bankrupt companies? Or taking ownership in those companies?

Wake up, people. Though they're doing their fair share, it ain't just the robes ignoring the constitution.

Common, you and Jane Fonda would make good bedfellows. You are free and you are safe! I don't understand all this blog, but I do know that war is sometimes necessary and I don't have any problem with no knock warrants. It's those people that are shady that have the problem!

Luv: I'm sure you'll feel differently about no-knock warrants when the police bust down your door and shoot your dog, only to find out they were given the wrong address. Oops!

And I would feel much more safe if we would quit antagonizing the countries of the Middle East and left them to their own devices. Oh wait, we need their oil, so let's mess with their internal politics, overthrow their leaders and sell guns to opposing factions to manufacture civil wars. What a good country based on Christian principles.

War is necessary for DEFENSIVE purposes. Go back and read George Washington who warned of getting involved in the internal affairs of other countries. Go back and read Eisenhower who warned of the growing influence of the military-industrial complex. Go back and read Jesus who taught us to love thine enemies - not to shoot them with depleted uranium rounds and laser-guided missiles.

And this blog is about the Constitution. Congress has the power to declare war. In none of the cases I cited above did they have the guts to do so. They may have passed a spending resolution or authorized the president blah-blah-blah. NEVER did they declare war like they did in WWII. Have some stones, Congress, and uphold the Constitution like you swore to do.

First of all how many times has that happened? Once is too many times I agree.. we don't know the whole story. Can't imagine a perfectly good person this happening to. I do not think we brought terrorism over here. The middle east brought it to our soil. How quickly we do forget. What were we supposed to do sit here like sitting ducks? What an idiot!!

Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people by bombing the Federal Building in Oklahoma in the deadliest terror attack before September 11, 2001. He certainly wasn't middle eastern.

They did, after following the rule of law that included a jury trial by his peers where he was able to confront witnesses and present evidence on his own behalf. In other words, they followed the constitutional process, which is the theme of the blog.

Or, they could have come after him with pitch forks and torches mob-style.

Get real. No one is condoning what McVeigh did, but when you abandon the justice system, you put yourself on the same level as those you condemn.

Common Sense!!! welcome back, we missed you and I really looked for you to pop up anytime when CS08 was so active.

I love this blog's topic,, and you are right! It has been changed too much, not long ago we had an administration wanting to amend the constitution,, some probably still do! I feel the constitution is the foundation and you can not change the foundation of something without weakening the whole. You can add to (Bill of Rights, new laws, etc) but the Supreme Court needs to interpret laws, maintaining the foundation! Example, marriage. Two people. From that you have the tradional marriage between a man and woman, then you have a common-law (in some states) marriage, then you branch out more and more until the word marriage no longer applies.. is that where we are today? ugghhhh.

smile, I can't wait for us to catch Bin Laden, bring him to a south georgia farm, plant him up to his neck in a fire ant hill, build a fence around and charge five dollars a person to go in privately and,,, you get the idea.

Thanks, Williamser. Had to stay away because of the election. The mindless rhetoric on both sides was overwhelming.

Ah Luv: typical war-loving right-wing apologist. When all else fails resort to ad hominem.

No-knocks at the wrong address happen more frequently than the general public is exposed to. Google "no-knock wrong address" and see for yourself.

If you review the history of the Middle East, you will find the West has been intervening in their politics since WWI when the British occupied the former Ottoman empire. Among others, the US has intervened in Lebanon, attacked Libya, helped Israel repress the Palestinians, and helped the Shah of Iran eliminate his political opponents way back in the later 1970's. More recently and quite ironically, we "regime changed" Saddam Hussein who was a very secular leader. He did not tolerate religious fanaticism like AlQaeda. But we took him out too.

The West has been meddling in the Middle East for decades - almost a century now. Unless you count the crusades which means we've been messing around there for centuries. 9/11 was seven years ago. Who is really forgetting? Certainly not the Arabs.

"What about American citizens being held as prisoners without indictment? Or being given a speedy trial?"

How many American Citizens are being held with no charges? The people held in places like Gitmo were captured fighting against the US military, and while I believe they should have been investigated and charged more quickly, we don't ever uphold the "speedy trial" part of the constatution. Violent crime offenders routinely wait years for their trials. Look at the local Futch murders, that should have been settled long ago.

BG: I agree with you on the speedy trial part.

I don't know how many American citizens are being held, but I do know its more than one. If even one American gets held like that, no matter what he or she did, we open the door for future abuses of power. Every American, regardless of the perceived severity of the crime, deserves due process. Period. Otherwise we hand the authority of determining who gets held without indictment to the government. That we cannot allow.

How do you know that, if you have no details of it? I am not denying it is truthful, although if it is, I hope it is people like the "American Taliban". Remember him? Dude got off way to easily in my opinion.

Commonsense, we did not declare on war on Iraq. We are not at war with that country. We went over there to save those people from Saddam Hussein and his allies. There is a very fine line here. If Bush would have done that...wouldn't you think his impeachment hearing would have already taken place? If we were at war with Iraq we'd just gone over there and bomb the he** out of them no matter who or what they were. I think our military is over there now helping them to have a peaceful nation and to rebuild...not to mention the many that were saved from Hussein. Too bad so many innocent people had to suffer and die at the hands of that man. We went after an evil man, not the country.