I was having a discussion in one of the groups today, and the question of the First Amendment came up. This was after we were talking about how SCOTUS created an unconstitutional law. I was asked how can Scotus create a law. I answered back by ruling on a subject that there are no real current laws on. He asked me how that can be. I brought up the religious freedom stuff. And that by making the ruling they did, they created a precedent that other courts have to follow.
He asked me for specifics, so I gave him the 1948 case of McCollum versus board of ed. and then I explained on how three more cases were based on McCollum. I explained to him, in my opinion, Scotus had overextended the First Amendment and created a law that wasn’t there. The First Amendment is very clear in its language it specifies exactly who it’s talking about. It says Congress shall not, not to state, not the people. I also brought up how the 10th amendment gives the power to the states and the people for anything that is not in the Constitution. There was the usual back-and-forth of very serious discussion, and thankfully none of the two-year-old acting out stuff.
I don’t think he got it, but, that’s okay. It will give him something to think about later.
What about you, what do you think about how the Supreme Court created a law that wasn’t even there, unconstitutionally? This is a serious question and would appreciate serious responses. Thank you.