As I wrote in a recent business blog post, it appeared that Indiana's treasurer might have managed to get the Supreme Court to slow the unconstitutional freight train that is the Chrysler bankruptcy.
Alas, it was not to be. The full Court declined to hear the case, stating that it failed to merit Supreme Court attention.
Tom Lauria, the plaintiff's attorney, said words to the effect that this non-decision makes one question whether the Court is capable of enforcing and protecting constitutional rights anymore.
To me, it's another reason to agitate for a Constitutional Convention. This seemed to be a pretty open-and-shut case. The federal government violated standing bankruptcy procedures and rights.
What more was to be known to allow the case to be heard?
As I said to a friend recently, the 25th amendment set term limits for the chief executive. Now, we need to finish the job for both of the other branches of the federal government.
It seems that our highest court can't focus anymore on its central job of enforcing the constitution.
I have no doubt some modifications in the form of a revised Constitution, or more amendments, could help rectify this problem.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment