The topic of
discussion for this Constitution Monday comes from Article III, Section 2,
Clause 1: “The judicial Power shall
extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the
Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under
their Authority. This means that federal
judges have the authority to hear questions concerning the applications of
treaties or agreements.
James Madison explained why he
thought the federal courts should be the tribunal to hear questions involving
treaties and agreements with foreign nations:
“With respect to treaties, there is a peculiar propriety in the
judiciary’s expounded them.
“These may involve us in
controversies with foreign nations. It
is necessary, therefore, that they should be determined in the courts of the
general government. There are strong
reasons why there should be a Supreme Court to decide such disputes. If, in any case, uniformity be necessary, it
must be in the exposition of treaties.
The establishment of one revisionary superintending power can alone
secure such uniformity…. As our
intercourse with foreign nations will be affected by decisions of this kind,
they ought to be uniform. This can only
be done by giving the federal judiciary exclusive jurisdiction. Controversies affecting the interest of the
United States ought to be determined by their own judiciary, and not be left to
partial, local tribunals.” (See W. Cleon
Skousen, The Making of America – The Substance
and Meaning of the Constitution, p. 598.)
No comments:
Post a Comment