Show the answer then and now the basic argument of those who favor changing the personnel of the supreme court to make it fit one economic viewpoint boils down to a single fundamental issue the court they say must be reorganized because it is not in tune with the times because the constitution prevents much legislation which the people of the country want apparently there is nothing new about such arguments more than a hundred years ago they were advanced and answered so effectively that the answer still stands here is what daniel webster said then it is hardly too strong to say that the constitution was made to guard people against the dangers of good intentions real or pretended there are men in all ages who mean to exercise power usefully but who mean to exercise it they mean to govern well but they mean to govern they promise to be kind masters but they mean to be masters in more recent years justice brandeis the courts most famed contemporary liberal put it if this way experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when hen purposes of government are bene focient fici ent men alen born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil minded persons the greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal well meaning but without understanding even years ago when the constitution was adopted and provision made for the supreme court as the umpire of all laws the drafters provided the constitutional amendment as the means for eternally letting the people determine how much of their liberties they wanted to 0 surrender to a powerful centralized government |