http://tspwiki.com/index.php?title=1610
Here are some one liners...
Galileo, Jupiter's Moons and Pluto's New Horizons -- Galileo improves the telescope and discovers 4 moons of Jupiter. I talk about Pluto, it's moons and the fact that Pluto is smaller than all of those 4 moons that Galileo discovered.
Judge Dread is Judged Illegal: Common Law vs. the Parliament -- This is all about judicial review and the fact that the people acting as policemen cannot also act as judge and executioner (or collect fines, etc.) The job of a judge is also to review the law itself.
Galileo, Jupiter's Moons and Pluto's New Horizons
Galileo has made improvements to his telescope, increasing its magnification to 20x. He turns his scope to the moon and is surprised to see imperfections in a heavenly body. Then he turns his scope to the planet Jupiter... a "wandering star" which is what the word "planet" means. Jupiter resolves itself into a disk. He notices three smaller stars near it and over the next few nights he realizes that these are moons. Soon a 4th moon resolves itself. These will be called the Galilean Moons. Galileo's daughter is only nine years old, but she can recognize her father's deep interest in the stars. She will enter a convent at age 13 and take the name of Sister Maria Celeste, as in "Mary of the Heavens". She will help her father with his work. Years later these heavenly observations will upset Church officials, but Galileo is a very smart man. He can tap dance with the best of them. In the modern day when the space probe Galileo reaches Jupiter it will count 67 moons, the largest being the ones spotted by Galileo and his little telescope. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
My Take by Alex Shrugged
The New Horizons space probe reached the frozen world of Pluto in mid-July of 2015. It was launched in 2006 after Pluto was found to have a large moon that they named Charon (usually pronounced Sharon). Charon was the mythological ferryman who would take souls across the River Styx into Hades. The moon is so large that one can say that Pluto and Charon actually orbit each other in a waltz. While New Horizons was on its way, 4 more moons were spotted. For a dwarf planet, Pluto has quite a number of moons, but the really amazing thing is that Pluto is smaller than any of the 4 Galilean moons. That is why scientists argued that Pluto isn't really a planet. They finally settled on calling Pluto a "dwarf planet" because Pluto is round and the scientists wanted to keep the public off of their backs. [9] [10]
The New Horizons space probe reached the frozen world of Pluto in mid-July of 2015. It was launched in 2006 after Pluto was found to have a large moon that they named Charon (usually pronounced Sharon). Charon was the mythological ferryman who would take souls across the River Styx into Hades. The moon is so large that one can say that Pluto and Charon actually orbit each other in a waltz. While New Horizons was on its way, 4 more moons were spotted. For a dwarf planet, Pluto has quite a number of moons, but the really amazing thing is that Pluto is smaller than any of the 4 Galilean moons. That is why scientists argued that Pluto isn't really a planet. They finally settled on calling Pluto a "dwarf planet" because Pluto is round and the scientists wanted to keep the public off of their backs. [9] [10]
Judge Dread is Judged Illegal: Common Law vs. the Parliament
The bottom line is that you can't have the policeman also be the judge and the executioner all in one body. Here is what happened... Doctor Bonham is examined, fined and jailed for practicing medicine without a license in London. The College of Physicians is the body designated by Parliament to judge London physicians and they are authorized to levy fines. But Doctor Bonham points out that he was certified in Cambridge so London had no right to fine him, Judge Coke sides with the doctor, but he also makes a persuasive argument that will echo down the ages. The judge points out that one should not be the judge and jury in one's own case. The College of Physicians acted as a judge of physicians and also benefited from the fines levied without a separate and impartial review. Even though the Parliament set up the law that way, common law and reason takes precedence. This is the beginning of judicial review... the idea that the judiciary has a role in reviewing laws against a higher authority such as the Constitution because leaving that determination to Congress or the Administration alone is too much like the fox guarding the hen house. [11] [12] [13]
My Take by Alex Shrugged
Judge Coke's decision led to the US Supreme Court decision in Marbury vs. Madison on judicial review. That is... the Supreme Court has the right to review the constitutionality of the laws passed by Congress. That may seem obvious today, but during the formation of the USA, it was not obvious. The Founding Fathers understood the problems of legislation and administration of government, but the role of the judiciary needed some fleshing out. The Supreme Court took the opportunity in Marbury vs. Madison to assert their authority of judicial review. Essentially, they said that their judgement was not limited to whether the law was correctly executed by the parties involved but also whether the law itself was constitutional. In the case of Marbury vs. Madison, Marbury sued for his rights as defined in the law, and Madison was wrong for blocking Marbury but the law itself was unconstitutional, so Marbury got nothing because it was a bad law. [14]
Judge Coke's decision led to the US Supreme Court decision in Marbury vs. Madison on judicial review. That is... the Supreme Court has the right to review the constitutionality of the laws passed by Congress. That may seem obvious today, but during the formation of the USA, it was not obvious. The Founding Fathers understood the problems of legislation and administration of government, but the role of the judiciary needed some fleshing out. The Supreme Court took the opportunity in Marbury vs. Madison to assert their authority of judicial review. Essentially, they said that their judgement was not limited to whether the law was correctly executed by the parties involved but also whether the law itself was constitutional. In the case of Marbury vs. Madison, Marbury sued for his rights as defined in the law, and Madison was wrong for blocking Marbury but the law itself was unconstitutional, so Marbury got nothing because it was a bad law. [14]
No comments:
Post a Comment