Who should write the Bill of Rights and Wrongs?

In a previous post I stated I will explore how and who, in my opinion, should write the Bill of Wrongs and how it can be passed and used constructively in the future to both teach rights and prevent better understanding of Rights and Wrongs.

James Madison

The first 10 amendments to the Constitution make up the Bill of Rights. Written by James Madison in response to calls from several states for greater constitutional protection for individual liberties, the Bill of Rights lists specific prohibitions on governmental power.

Thomas Jefferson 

Jefferson wrote the draft of The Declaration of Independence, he wrote that all men have rights. These included “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

However, he was not one of the Framers of the Constitution, he was in France during the Philadelphia convention in which the Constitution was drafted, and other than some correspondence with James Madison had no role in its creation or ratification.

At the end of his life, 40 years after the creation of the Constitution, Jefferson was asked to lend his hand in a political campaign. In this excerpt from a letter to Samuel Kercheval, Jefferson discusses his belief that the Constitution should be re-drafted “every nineteen or twenty years” in order to “keep pace with the times” and provide “progressive accommodation to progressive improvements” to society.

I am not too certain if Jefferson was being a Progressive (Left) as in our modern political terminology, or just being pragmatic to recognize that past circumstances may not always be appropriate in the future. In other words, change may be necessary to tune up to improve upon the Constitution if deemed necessary by Congress, not SCOTUS.

Did he perhaps recommend the Constitution be reviewed over time to improve it because when he originally wrote the Declaration of Independence, he tried to abolish slavery but was unsuccessful?

Who Should Write the Bill of Rights and Wrongs?

I am neither a lawyer nor a Constitution legal authority. What I am proposing is to suggest SCOTUS should review the Bill of Rights and “say what the law is, not what it should be.”

In other words, SCOTUS should write a draft of what are unlawful actions (Wrongs) that the Bill of Rights is not misinterpreted and confused with personal or political ideology.

Congress should then debate and pass a new Bill of Wrongs, rather than to amend the Bill of Rights.  Note the purpose is not to change or amend the original Bill of Rights so therefore, a Constitutional Convention is not required.

In My Opinion

This next Presidential Election may be a critical ‘point of no return’ for the future of the USA. Discern wisely what you want or believe will provide hope for a prospect for upward mobility in the future for your posterity before you cast your ballet.

I recommend you read Citizen Tom’s Post outline comparison and comments in the Sources below to help you discern choices between Clinton or Trump.

I would add a comment in his Judicial Restraint under Clinton that the next choice she will appoint to the Supreme Court could be a possibility of this person’s opinion.

“So to those still in the “Never Trump” camp, let me say this: sitting out this election for any adolescent reason will surely put Clinton in the White House — and it just might put Obama on the Supreme Court.”

(Dale Plautz, Round Lake in Chicago Tribune Voice of the People 9/6/16)

You Decide

Is this issue a contrived will-o’-the-wisp goal or hope of mine or is it a valid concern which needs to be addressed to prevent a future violence to occur in the USA?

Keep in mind just the three Example issues I used in Post Three. My observation we Americans and our politicians very seldom do anything proactive. We usually wake up and move after a crisis occurs. Is this wise or foolish on our part?

English astronomer Francis Baily, in his Journal, written in 1797 wrote this phrase.

“A stich in time saves nine.”

Compare that phrase with King Solomon’s 3000-year-old proverb in Post Three.

 The beginning of strife is seepage of water; so desist before the quarrel erupts. (Proverb 17:14)

I keep wondering why it is that each new generation over time just cannot seem to wise up. Why is it that we refuse to learn the easy way by taking advice from past generations so as not to repeat the same follies recorded in history?

However, in my opinion, King David knew why he was smarter than his elders when he wrote Psalm 119:100.

Oh Well, I guess our generation knows better! Read the news, and then decide if we really do know better.

Regards and goodwill blogging.

Sources

Citizen Tom Candidates Stand HERE

Tomas Jefferson Progressive HERE

Bill of Rights HERE

Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence HERE

Psalm 119:100 HERE

Previous Posts

Post One HERE

Post Two HERE

Post Three HERE