3 ms·

I seem to recall that at one point in american history^1, courts could and would strike down laws that were deemed unnecessarily esoteric to the point that they

I seem to recall that at one point in american history^1, courts could and would strike down laws that were deemed unnecessarily esoteric to the point that they were incomprehensible to the "common man". when you see a system with decades or even centuries of regulations built up via 'regulation, loophole, regulation etc.' you have to wonder if we don't need a clean sheet design. 1. inherited from european common law.

bd_at_rivenhill 17y ago
That would be a great idea, but I don't think the courts would ever make a ruling that would cause the entire tax system to collapse, which would be the only logical result of eliminating laws that are unnecessarily esoteric.
- apotheon 17y ago
  Too bad. The tax code needs to be nuked and paved.
windsurfer 17y ago
That is still possible in th US, but the case needs to come before the supreme court.
- apotheon 17y ago
  That's not strictly true. Any court can decide that a law is not enforceable within its jurisdiction -- but a higher court can overturn that decision. The Supreme Court comes into it because at that point there's no higher court that can overturn a decision. All that can happen at that point is passage of a different version of the law that doesn't suffer the same issues or an amendment to the Constitution.
jekyllnhyde 17y ago
A court has the power to strike down laws for a variety of reasons. Only CRIMINAL laws tend to be held to the standard of review you are referring to. A few torts will be as well (for example Assault or Battery civil laws.) But generally to be more accurate you would need to say that the law CAN be struck down if the INTENDED CLASS is able to neither determine its meaning NOR guess it from their experience. Courts will do anything they can to uphold a statute. BUT the above discussion is both correct and incorrect. A trial court can strike down a law that has not previously been ruled on by a higher court. So if the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on it no other court in the country can do anything about it ever. (more or less. They might rule around it or strike it down on different grounds.) If the U.S. Supreme court hasn't ruled on it then the court is free. It is more complicated than that because the relation between state and federal courts is being ignored here. For the most part laws are only struck down for being unconstitutional for one reason or another. You are referring to when a law is "unconstitutionally vague." Finally - The American Common Law tradition specifically comes from English Common Law. Continental Europe used, and still uses, the Civil Code system which is based on Roman and then Napoleonic Codes.

bd_at_rivenhill 17y ago

That would be a great idea, but I don't think the courts would ever make a ruling that would cause the entire tax system to collapse, which would be the only logical result of eliminating laws that are unnecessarily esoteric.

apotheon 17y ago
Too bad. The tax code needs to be nuked and paved.

windsurfer 17y ago

That is still possible in th US, but the case needs to come before the supreme court.

apotheon 17y ago
That's not strictly true. Any court can decide that a law is not enforceable within its jurisdiction -- but a higher court can overturn that decision. The Supreme Court comes into it because at that point there's no higher court that can overturn a decision. All that can happen at that point is passage of a different version of the law that doesn't suffer the same issues or an amendment to the Constitution.

jekyllnhyde 17y ago

A court has the power to strike down laws for a variety of reasons. Only CRIMINAL laws tend to be held to the standard of review you are referring to. A few torts will be as well (for example Assault or Battery civil laws.) But generally to be more accurate you would need to say that the law CAN be struck down if the INTENDED CLASS is able to neither determine its meaning NOR guess it from their experience. Courts will do anything they can to uphold a statute. BUT the above discussion is both correct and incorrect. A trial court can strike down a law that has not previously been ruled on by a higher court. So if the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on it no other court in the country can do anything about it ever. (more or less. They might rule around it or strike it down on different grounds.) If the U.S. Supreme court hasn't ruled on it then the court is free. It is more complicated than that because the relation between state and federal courts is being ignored here. For the most part laws are only struck down for being unconstitutional for one reason or another. You are referring to when a law is "unconstitutionally vague." Finally - The American Common Law tradition specifically comes from English Common Law. Continental Europe used, and still uses, the Civil Code system which is based on Roman and then Napoleonic Codes.