consistency wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:I am aware of how things have been done, and I'm saying it's wrong. The Supreme Court should be ruling on first principles on every case. If they don't then we risk propagating a bad decision from one generation to the next, which is exactly what's happened.
If you disregard case law, then you lose consistency and no one really knows what the law is. As a real estate developer, I know the case law regarding the 5th amendment and takings. I know when my rights are being violated because I can look to past rulings. If every judge and justice rules based on their own interpretation, the whole system becomes arbitrary and I no longer even know what rights I have.
Good point. Lower courts should rule based on case law and precedence to maintain consistency on a day to day basis, but once a case makes it to the Supreme Court then they should be referring back to rule book to make their decisions. The rule book, the Constitution should be the rock solid foundation on which all expectations are built.
I ask you this. What kind of consistency do we have today in our currently lawless society where the Federal Government can write any law it wishes and change it on the fly, like ObamaCare. How can anyone make business plans when the government has entered the venture capital game and might at any moment suddenly give your competitor $100 million dollars. That's arbitrary. That's terrifying. That's inconsistent.
The single greatest strength this country had competing on the world stage is that our government was the best at staying out of the way of businesses. We were never perfect, but compared to other countries we were much more "consistent". Now we've lowered ourselves to Banana Republic status with some of the lawless things our government is doing, and it is hurting business.