HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY  JULY 4,2022

The Founding Fathers of the United States were directed as well as inspired by God in the creation and writing of the United States Constitution. Over the 220 plus years that the constitution has existed the constitution has undergone many changes. To distinguish the original constitution from the constitution that the United States is governed by today we will call the original document the Founding Fathers Constitution. Yet the SCOTUS FAILED  the interpretation of the original constitution by allowing party lines to influence their decisions.

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"-These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court is "distinctly American in concept and function," as Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes observed. Few other courts in the world have the same authority of constitutional interpretation and none have exercised it for as long or with as much influence. A century and a half ago, the French political observer Alexis de Tocqueville noted the unique position of the Supreme Court in the history of nations and of jurisprudence. "The representative system of government has been adopted in several states of Europe," he remarked, "but I am unaware that any nation of the globe has hitherto organized a judicial power in the same manner as the Americans. . . . A more imposing judicial power was never constituted by any people."

The unique position of the Supreme Court stems, in large part, from the deep commitment of the American people to the Rule of Law and to constitutional government. The United States has demonstrated an unprecedented determination to preserve and protect its written Constitution, thereby providing the American "experiment in democracy" with the oldest written Constitution still in force.

The Constitution of the United States is a carefully balanced document. It is designed to provide for a national government sufficiently strong and flexible to meet the needs of the republic, yet sufficiently limited and just to protect the guaranteed rights of citizens; it permits a balance between society’s need for order and the individual’s right to freedom. To assure these ends, the Framers of the Constitution created three independent and coequal branches of government. That this Constitution has provided continuous democratic government through the periodic stresses of more than two centuries illustrates the genius of the American system of government.

The complex role of the Supreme Court in this system derives from its authority to invalidate legislation or executive actions which, in the Court’s considered judgment, conflict with the Constitution. This power of "judicial review" has given the Court a crucial responsibility in assuring individual rights, as well as in maintaining a "living Constitution" whose broad provisions are continually applied to complicated new situations.

While the function of judicial review is not explicitly provided in the Constitution, it had been anticipated before the adoption of that document. Prior to 1789, state courts had already overturned legislative acts which conflicted with state constitutions. Moreover, many of the Founding Fathers expected the Supreme Court to assume this role in regard to the Constitution; Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, for example, had underlined the importance of judicial review in the Federalist Papers, which urged adoption of the Constitution.

Hamilton had written that through the practice of judicial review the Court ensured that the will of the whole people, as expressed in their Constitution, would be supreme over the will of a legislature, whose statutes might express only the temporary will of part of the people. And Madison had written that constitutional interpretation must be left to the reasoned judgment of independent judges, rather than to the tumult and conflict of the political process. If every constitutional question were to be decided by public political bargaining, Madison argued, the Constitution would be reduced to a battleground of competing factions, political passion and partisan spirit.

Despite this background the Court’s power of judicial review was not confirmed until 1803, when it was invoked by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison. In this decision, the Chief Justice asserted that the Supreme Court's responsibility to overturn unconstitutional legislation was a necessary consequence of its sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. That oath could not be fulfilled any other way. "It is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the law is," he declared.

In retrospect, it is evident that constitutional interpretation and application were made necessary by the very nature of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers had wisely worded that document in rather general terms leaving it open to future elaboration to meet changing conditions. As Chief Justice Marshall noted in McCulloch v. Maryland, a constitution that attempted to detail every aspect of its own application "would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind. . . . Its nature, therefore, requires that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects designated, and the minor ingredients which compose those objects be deduced from the nature of the objects themselves."

The Constitution limits the Court to dealing with "Cases" and "Controversies." John Jay, the first Chief Justice, clarified this restraint early in the Court’s history by declining to advise President George Washington on the constitutional implications of a proposed foreign policy decision. The Court does not give advisory opinions; rather, its function is limited only to deciding specific cases.

The Justices must exercise considerable discretion in deciding which cases to hear, since approximately 7,000-8,000 civil and criminal cases are filed in the Supreme Court each year from the various state and federal courts. The Supreme Court also has "original jurisdiction" in a very small number of cases arising out of disputes between States or between a State and the Federal Government.

When the Supreme Court rules on a constitutional issue, that judgment is virtually final; its decisions can be altered only by the rarely used procedure of constitutional amendment or by a new ruling of the Court. However, when the Court interprets a statute, new legislative action can be taken.

Chief Justice Marshall expressed the challenge which the Supreme Court faces in maintaining free government by noting: "We must never forget that it is a constitution we are expounding . . . intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs."

The U. S. Founding Fathers were provided with a unique perspective that few people in history have experienced firsthand that is living under both extremes of government rule. The authority of a tyrannical government as well as living under an ineffectual government charter with insufficient powers to govern. Initially life under the King George III of England was acceptable. In fact, most of the people enjoyed life under the authority of the King of England. As time passed grievances arose that the King was unable or unwilling to address. The King’s unwillingness to correct the problems encountered by the colonists mounted till corrections had to be made. The King refusing to address the problems worsened the situation for the colonists by adding additional laws, tariffs and taxes onto the backs of the colonists. A once loved King George III became a tyrannical leader. The U. S. Founding Fathers attempted to redress the situation through every legal avenue they had available. This eventually led to a hardening of positions on both sides which in turn led to the Revolutionary War.

Life under an Ineffective Government Charter

The colonies after cutting ties with England established a charter the Articles of Confederation to administer the duties, obligations of the thirteen colonies as well as conducting the war. The Articles of Confederation were found to be ineffective not providing sufficient authority to the central government. The Articles of Confederation were dependent upon the colonies relinquishing authority over their territory. The colonists as well as their colonial governments were unwilling to give the central government sufficient authority to effectively govern the thirteen colonies. In spite of these deficiencies the Colonists were able to win the Revolutionary War. George Washington credited the colonies performance in the war to acts of Providence. The colonists lived several years under the limited authority of the central government governing using the Articles of Confederation charter. This allowed the colonists to understand the disadvantages of life under a government that did not possess sufficient authority to effectively rule. Living under these two extremes the Founding Fathers knew the disadvantages of both governmental entities. The Founding Fathers historical experience allowed them to create a comprehensive document designed to protect the rights of the people.

The Founding Father’s Constitution

Life under the rule of the King taught the colonists to fear absolute control. Whereas life under the charter of the Articles of Confederation taught the Founders that a central government must have certain powers and authority to be able to govern properly. Faced with these two opposing positions the U. S. Founding Fathers undertook the creation of the United States Constitution.

Checks and Balances

The Founders were fearful that a central government over time would increase its authority and control over the people established sets of checks and balances to limit the ability of the central government to morph into a tyrannical government without the approval of the States and the people. To protect the rights and freedom of the people checks and balances were established. Thomas Jefferson believed that the government at the State level, being closer to the people, would provide the people with greater representation. By balancing the authority of the national government with the combined powers of the States the powers of the national government are limited. In this manner the powers of the Federal government are balanced between the States and the Federal or central government. Though the power of the Federal government was now balanced the Founding Fathers were still fearful that the central government could still develop into a tyrannical government body. Further checks were established to limit and restrict the ability of the central government from acquiring additional authority and power over the people. Among the checks three entities of the national government established branches with specific duties and responsibilities. Each branch had VETO authority over the other branches. The bi-camel congress was given separate distinct responsibilities. A bi-camel congress was established to represent their segment of the controlling government bodies. The Senate was to defend the State’s rights whereas the House of Representatives were to represent the people. It is this VETO authority that provides the checks to an out-of-control Federal government.

States Rights

The Federal government’s authority and powers are derived directly from the States. The States were placed between the Federal government and the people. In this way the States are a “Wall of Political Protection” protecting the rights and freedom of the people. To accomplish this control authority the States were provided with Senators that would be under direct control of their State legislature. The U. S. Senators were to report directly to their State legislature to determine the response the Senators should or should not take at the Federal level of government. The U. S. Senators were appointed by their States legislature. The Senators were subject to the dictates of their particular State’s legislature. In this way the States could protect the States authority as well as protect the freedom of its citizenry from infringing power of the Federal government. The House of Representatives was established to represent and protect the people of their state. The House Representatives were elected by their state’s registered voters. The House Representatives served subject to the dictates of the people.

Founding Fathers

The Founding Fathers established the separation of powers along with the redundancy of checks and balances so that the unalienable rights and freedom of the people could be adequately protected. The Founders were so fearful of the possibility that the central government would morph over time to become tyrannical that the Bill of Rights was added to the Founding Fathers constitution. The Bill of Rights established the specific restrictions dictating the limits that were to be placed on the Federal government. It was only with the addition of the Bill of Rights to the constitution that all the Founders got on board willing to accept the Founding Fathers constitution as the official governing document. The Founders constitution was completed in 1787 and enacted in into the law of the land in 1789.