Myths about American politics...

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

The Constitution was crafted to be a living document. It was left deliberately vague in many cases due to the fact that the Framers had the foresight to realize that they couldn't possibly know what specific issues would arise in the future--and which issues that at the time seemed vital would later fade to obscurity (the 3rd Amendment comes to mind here).

But the changes to the Constitution were not meant to be done via the Courts; they should be done via amendments.

Marbury v. Madison?

What do you mean?

Sorry, made a mistake. Disregard that statement.

Anyway, isn't it the courts' job to interpret the law and, by extension, the Constitution?

Yes, it's their job to interpret the law and the Constitution (altough I'd argue not by extension - I'd argue those two are different in their origin, although same in ultimate outcome... a small difference).

Were the civil rights cases (Brown v Board of Education and stuff) not interpretations of the law and Constitution?

Yes.  They were.  And equal protection under the law is something that should be enforced in schools, because that's a public institution.

But private institutions can defy the Constitution all they want, right?

It depends what the issue is.  Take the First Amendment, for example: if a private company wants to restrict speech, that's their right.  What authority, under the Constitution does Congress have to say a small diner can't have separate seating for whites and blacks?  In my opinion, they don't.  Does that mean I think diners should be able to segregate seating?  Absolutely not.

The SCOTUS unanimously disagreed with you. Remember this as you enter 1L.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel_v._United_States

I spent 30 minutes trying to remember that case.

And like I said, I realize that the Court disagrees with me.  And if I were ever in a judicial position, I'd put my personal beliefs aside and go along with the precedent.  I think the Court got the case wrong, but at this point, we're too far along to reverse years of precedent.

[True Federalist]

But private institutions can defy the Constitution all they want, right?

It depends what the issue is.  Take the First Amendment, for example: if a private company wants to restrict speech, that's their right.  What authority, under the Constitution does Congress have to say a small diner can't have separate seating for whites and blacks?  In my opinion, they don't.  Does that mean I think diners should be able to segregate seating?  Absolutely not.

The SCOTUS unanimously disagreed with you. Remember this as you enter 1L.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel_v._United_States

I spent 30 minutes trying to remember that case.

And like I said, I realize that the Court disagrees with me.  And if I were ever in a judicial position, I'd put my personal beliefs aside and go along with the precedent.  I think the Court got the case wrong, but at this point, we're too far along to reverse years of precedent.

If you take a look at the actual opinions, it is entirely possible that future court could invalidate Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 without straining the concept of precedent.  The majority opinion by Clark based upholding it on both the Commerce Clause and the Congressional findings that discrimination against negroes led to a considerable interference in interstate commerce.  If a future court found that permitting businesses to discriminate would no longer lead to considerable interference because it would no longer be a widespread practice, then it would be conceivable that Title II could be struck by a future court.

Note: Black's concurrence asserted that the Commerce Clause by itself without needing a finding of interference caused by discrimination was sufficient to uphold. Douglas and Black in their concurrences asserted that Title II could be upheld on Fourteenth Amendment grounds as well.

[Link]

What authority, under the Constitution does Congress have to say a small diner can't have separate seating for whites and blacks?

Interstate Commerce Clause.

If you ever get the opportunity in your life to speak to an older black person that lived during Jim Crow ask them how hard it was to travel.  You couldn't just assume whatever dinner, hotel, motel, etc. you found on the highway would have adequate facilities for you and your family.

I used to think Black History Month was pointless but I am beginning to see its value.  Listen to some of the stories about black musicians, athletes, and entertainers from back in the 50s and 60s.  When on the road it was a pain in the ass trying to find a place to eat and sleep.