Lord Sumption | THB The American Constitution Is Not Fit For Purpose | Cambridge Union

[@philright8197]

He's brilliant as always.

[@andyosb]

Very good. As a Brit who has lived in the USA I've admired the US Constitution over the British lack of one for a long time, but he's made some very good points whivh are making me reconsider my previous views

[@barry5787]

Spot on.

[@PaulR-os3po]

I have enormous, truly enormous respect for Lord Sumption. But, as an American, I found his analysis to lack understanding of our system, our history, and our size.

[@ajaymanchester8746]

That's a disrespect to say lord sumption have lack of knowledge on american constitution...he has knowledge on every constitution across the world

[@desmondcompany4965]

I'm gobsmacked by the lack of understanding of the US system.

[@ConcordeForever]

Oh the delicious old-fashionedness of it.

[@lawlawyersonlinewithwaseem2400]

❤

[@pearlmargaret2004]

I wasn't aware Britain had a Constitution, Your Lordship. Surely Iraq, at least, revealed that primary deficit - and fact.

[@onelife7247]

How is this a rational debate when there’s no counter argument in response to the points/claims made by Ld. Sumption?

[@utd4theleagueutd4theleague17]

If you use the search bar👆 you can find the opposition.

[@paulvmarks]

The Constitutions of such States as Texas and Alabama make very clear that anything that the Constitution does not specifically give the government the power to do, it may NOT do. In the case of the Federal Government some people warned that the Federal Government would not consider itself limited to what the Constitution specifically allowed it to do - that is why the Bill of Rights (specifically the Ninth and Tenth Amendments - which should be the First and Second Amendments) was passed, basically to prevent the modern (unlimited) Federal Government emerging - but slightly loose wording, and deeply intellectually corrupted judges, have undermined the Tenth Amendment. Nor is this "just" an economic matter of limiting regulations and government - such organisations as the FBI (indeed all the Federal "security" and "Justice" agencies) have nothing but hatred and contempt for the Rule of Law (which is also hated by so many judges) and fundamental Civil Liberties. Sadly juries in some parts of the United States also hate and despise the Rule of Law and fundamental Civil Liberties - they take perverted pleasure in convict people they know to be innocent, in both Civil and Criminal trials (they convict on POLITICAL grounds, political hatred - and openly say so). No Constitution is any good if the people become corrupted - as John Adams said, the United States Constitution was for a moral and religious people, sadly the populations of the big cities are just about the opposite of that.

[@colinthompson3111]

Respectfuly disagree with Lord Sumption. He has the politics of the US system perfectly analyzed. What he forgets is that everyone has become a citizen under the US Constitution. Every US citizen looks to the Constitution. It may not be perfect but it has been in operation as countries like the UK struggled to bring democracy during the 19th and 20th centuries.

[@Photomonon]

The constitution was a charter. How many constitution does the US have in history? What was the role of Benjamin Franklin and his proximity to the French? Who are Unidroit, and what is the UCC that all states adobt a version of? Is an account rendered in court and what's the commercial nature of crime? How do administrative agencies evade seperation of power? Your government isn't real, it has no constitution, you're bonded to a corporation split by a false political dichotomy and rallied every 4 years. Cooperatives, agencies, and thier interests are the mission. Its just business. Don't be a fool, answer the question for yourself. Or stay in the cave, your choice. You should know your civics and understand in totality what defines sovereignty. None of the US states are sovereign but operate as such, so there is the gap. Or are they soveirgn? How could they be but in only a quasi state of being.

[@FrankJefferson-gv1bg]

That citizens are made by, and look up to, the constitution neither contradicts nor refutes the argument he puts forward. Could you set out your couterargument more clearly?

[@colinthompson3111]

The Constitution is fit for purpose because it resides in the hearts and minds of the American electorate. They complain bitterly about their political system, but they want the Constitution followed. That is what maintains democracy. The Constitution has been amended before. The rigidity of Constitutional change means consensus is required. The political nature of the US Supreme Court was present in the UK prior to PM Asquith changing things with a Parliament Bill. The presence of negative political situations doesn't negate a Constitution. Peter Irons History of the Supreme Court documents well how the Constitution was abused by the Supreme Court. But it is the Supreme Court using the Constitution to strike down laws like segregation, abortion laws, government legislation that has protected American rights. The UK has a system where Parliament tells you your rights. Americans didn't like that in 1776. Or today.

[@paulvmarks]

@@FrankJefferson-gv1bg Lord S. does not really produce an argument - as he has no real understanding of what the United States is for, or even what it says.

[@garyc1384]

What you say has little bearing on his points. You appear to be at cross purposes

[@EdMcF1]

His very first proposition is wrong.

[@garyc1384]

haha - no reasoning, we note. Just a literally dumb statement

[@Rodeo32145]

You fit the term of liberal professor! Congratulations.NOT!!

[@mariusciobotaru3]

@@Besthinktwice In the political and social American environment, he's by all relevant metrics a liberal. Liberals are also relatively conservative, but not insane. American conservatives are a bunch of lunatics who deny empiricism as a reliable means to invatigate the world, adopting instead a form of emotional fanaticism and religious fundamentalism. The American conservative is the equivalent of a medieval peasant, scientifically illiterate and not significantly more intelligent than our immediate anthropoid relatives. A person that can only relate to the world through the narrow lenses of dogmatic superstintion and conspiratorial narratives, which are especially potent in the current online spaces and global network of open, unmoderated information access influencing the uneducated.

[@varivavariva6045]

A despicable bigoted judge👎👎👎

[@andyosb]

Calm down. It's a college debafe. These things are a good way of probing issues intellectually without actually changing anything (like the Federal Papers). That's got to be a good thing if you want to test your system. Open debate is the cornerstone of democrac y (isn't it?! 😉)

[@Spv1627]

@@varivavariva6045 Lord Sumption has got to be one of the most widely read, widely respected Judges to have ever served the Law in this country. To call him despicable or bigoted is to show that you have never truly listened to the man.

[@scottsound4711]

@@andyosb His point stands .