| [Ben]: | Who is held responsible for bad laws? | No discussion found | Now and then a law is held by the Supreme Court to be unConstitutional and those imprisoned for breaking the law (in the case at hand, anyway) are released. But other than a change of whether a law is enforced, what good is it?
If a Congress passes a law, and a President signs it, the executive branch enforces it and the courts convict people for breaking it, they are acting directly on the people of the United States. If that law violates the civil liberties of said people, they are directly denying civil rights to American citizens. As I recall, this is a federal felony. However, there is no punishment for creating unConstitutional laws. There is no incentive to not try to pass such a law.
So why is no one responsible for it? Why not those who create the law, those who enforce the law or those who judge the law? Why should no individual fear passing, enforcing or wrongfully judging based on an unjust law?
|
| 2004-11-23
Permanent Link:
Who is held responsible for bad laws? |
