Five times the Supreme Court reversed a precedent

[Peter1469]

The Supreme Court was intended to be the weakest branch of government. If they have too much power, it's because the congress is allowing them to aquire this power.

Each branch was intended to be co-equals, with different functions of course.

[Tahuyaman]

Each branch was intended to be co-equals, with different functions of course.

The "co-equal" thing is a myth. The founders intended the congress to be the most powerful branch of government.

[Peter1469]

The "co-equal" thing is a myth. The founders intended the congress to be the most powerful branch of government.

In legislation. Yes.

[Tahuyaman]

In legislation. Yes.

They intended the legislative branch to be “supreme” for a lack of a better word. Even if the Supreme Court defines the boundaries of the congress, the Congress can legislatively change those boundaries.

[Skull]

The "co-equal" thing is a myth. The founders intended the congress to be the most powerful branch of government.

Whether it was intended or only a hope...? In any case, the Congress began their irresponsible habit of delegating to the Executive branch's administrative state and now that monstrous bureaucracy dominates.

[Tahuyaman]

Whether it was intended or only a hope...? In any case, the Congress began their irresponsible habit of delegating to the Executive branch's administrative state and now that monstrous bureaucracy dominates.

Yes, the congress has delegated some of their authority to a president. That’s a result of cowardice. That still doesn’t change the intent of the founders of the nation.

[Centinel]

Yes, until corrected. But...

WHOA! Hold the phone.

So if the federal government is telling us about the constitution. And they say that the word "person" actually means "skateboarder", then this would be the law of the land? Until the federal government might possibly decide otherwise?

That would mean that there literally is no meaning to the constitition other than what the federal government says.

Horrifying.

[Centinel]

Makes me wonder. Why did the founders even write down all the rules by which the union would operate?

They didn't.

They didn't write a document that constituted the union?

[Peter1469]

They didn't write a document that constituted the union?

You didn't ask that.

You said:

Originally Posted by Centinel
Makes me wonder. Why did the founders even write down all the rules by which the union would operate?

The Constitution is not a detailed How To list. The EU's constitution more fits that bill and is hundreds of pages long. The US constitution is more of a declaration of principles more about what the federal government can't do.

[Chris]

WHOA! Hold the phone.

So if the federal government is telling us about the constitution. And they say that the word "person" actually means "skateboarder", then this would be the law of the land? Until the federal government might possibly decide otherwise?

That would mean that there literally is no meaning to the constitition other than what the federal government says.

Horrifying.

Not in practice.

There's no one to stop the government. Only occasionally is it self-correcting.