FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69  
70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   >>  
ed, neither Congress nor the state legislatures can ruin America. If the American people should ever consent to the removal of these safeguards they would give evidence of their want of self-restraint, of their unwillingness and even incapacity to govern themselves, and would pave the way for the man on horseback as the French Revolution paved the way for Napoleon. To deprive a single one of his rightful liberty is to endanger the liberties of all. CHAPTER VII THE INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS NECESSARILY A FUNCTION OF THE JUDICIARY Under our federal and state form of government the question naturally arises where should be lodged the power to determine whether in a given instance either department has encroached on the proper field of any other department, and whether either department has encroached on the constitutional rights of the individual citizen. It should be evident that neither the executive nor the legislative department is a fit depositary of such power. Both these, from the nature of their powers, are aggressive. They act of their own volition. They initiate proceedings and measures to carry out policies. In their activities they are apt, consciously or unconsciously, to overstep the boundary lines between the departments and also the limits set for the protection of the citizen against such activities. Again, questions may and often do arise between the government and the individual citizen that are not political questions, but are questions of private right, the right of the individual against the government. The disputants are the individual citizen or group of citizens on the one hand, and the government on the other whether that government be a monarchy, a republican or representative government, or a pure democracy. In such case it would seem clear that one party should not have the power to decide the question. It is an axiom that neither party to a controversy should be the judge in the matter. The legislature that enacts a statute claimed by a citizen to be beyond its powers and to deprive him of some right guaranteed to him by the constitution, should not be the judge of the question any more than should the complaining citizen. So the executive should not be the judge where a citizen claims it has exceeded its powers to the detriment of his constitutional or statutory rights. Even if a statute be enacted or ratified by the people directly, under the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69  
70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   >>  



Top keywords:

citizen

 

government

 

department

 
individual
 
questions
 

question

 

powers

 

activities

 
executive
 

constitutional


statute
 

encroached

 

rights

 

deprive

 

people

 

disputants

 

citizens

 

America

 
private
 

monarchy


democracy

 

republican

 

representative

 

political

 

American

 

limits

 

departments

 

consent

 

boundary

 

protection


claims

 

exceeded

 
complaining
 

constitution

 

detriment

 

statutory

 

directly

 
ratified
 
enacted
 

guaranteed


controversy

 
legislatures
 

matter

 

decide

 
legislature
 
enacts
 

Congress

 

endanger

 

liberties

 

claimed