[sholling]

We can only wonder how our lives would be different if congress and the courts stuck to the letter of the rule of the supreme law of the land as codified by the US Constitution. Unfortunately both institutions have taken the approach these rules of law my be twisted or even ignored to allow what some in those institutions feel are higher moral purposes. One only needs to look at the the 10th Amendment to realize that most of what have become accepted federal government functions are in fact illegal.

As far as lesser laws go we have the centuries old concept of jury nullification. The idea that if a jury feels that a law is wrong or unfairly applied that it may find a defendant not guilty. During the 1960s and early 1970s the government and the courts became appalled that a few war protesters were getting off, and perhaps felt that their majesty and authority were threatened by this democratization of the courts. That's when limits began to be placed on what were allowable defenses in court. This has progressed to the point that a defendant and his/her attorney may be held in contempt of court for mentioning the concept in the presence of a jury, or introducing a defense that may be deemed politically incorrect or that challenge the morality of the law itself.