He has what I would hope be a memorable quote in Federalist Paper #22, "Other Defects of the Present Confederation". In referring to the purpose of courts, he said -
"Laws are dead letters without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation"
It seems to me this gets at the core of one of the major debates in this country, including the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.
What do you make of it.
I am not sure how Judge Garland ties in. Given the context, and Hamilton's following explanation, I take the point of his quote to be the need for a supreme judiciary, (ie. the Supreme Court), to ensure laws are to be interpreted and applied uniformly, as applied to all individuals, communities, and states.
Do you see a different meaning?
Hi back, GA
Given today's debate over the role of the court and how each side perceives how Judge Garland will interpret that role is the basis, as I see it, for the GOP refusal to consider his nomination. That is how I see the tie-in.
While it is possible Hamilton was thinking of the Supreme Court, it is more possible, in my view, he was making a general statement on the purpose of the courts relative to laws. I suspect you may understand " expound and define their true meaning and operation" differently than I do. To me, that phrases is the antithesis of "strict construction".
by leeberttea7 years ago
... to carry regardless of state or local laws?I think the Supreme Court will rule today that Americans, all Americans have the constitutional right to carry guns and states and cities can not limit that right! This is...
by Kathryn L Hill23 months ago
Alexander Hamilton was a trip!Where would we be today without him?Alexander Hamilton, (born January 11, 1755,) pretty much created Wall Street / Stocks and Bonds. He favored a strong central government, a strong...
by ahorseback3 months ago
The most perfect example of ideological pollution of the lower federal courts by Obama and his corrupted administration has been exposed , Yesterday the US Supreme Courts...
by Paul Swendson6 years ago
If Alexander Hamilton were alive today, would he be a Republican or a Democrat? Why?
by Susie Lehto6 months ago
There should not have been a need at all for Senate Bill 97 in the United States. The House voted 56-44 to prohibit sharia law. I'd like the names of the block heads who voted against that bill, they should...
by Kathryn L Hill2 years ago
Which do you prefer?
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.