“ALL PRECEDENTS ARE UNDER THE CONTROUL OF THE PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW … No Acts of Parliament can establish such a writ [writ of assistance enabling British search of homes for no reason]: … it would be void, "AN ACT AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION IS VOID." Vid. Viner. But … special writs may be granted on oath and probable suspicion.”

— James Otis Jr.

Massachusetts Spy (April 29, 1773)(Principle of judicial review. In addition, much like the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution).

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "ALL PRECEDENTS ARE UNDER THE CONTROUL OF THE PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW … No Acts of Parliament can establish such a writ [w…" by James Otis Jr.?

James Otis Jr.13

Lawyer in colonial Massachusetts 1725–1783

Related quotes

“An act against the Constitution is void; an act against natural equity is void.”

James Otis Jr. (1725–1783) Lawyer in colonial Massachusetts

Argument Against the Writs of Assistance (1761)

“When we framed the Constitution, we adopted the British model. Therefore, the President acts as the crown. You see, Britain has no written constitution. So, there is nothing unconstitutional there. But in India we have a Constitution and any legislation even by Parliament contrary to the Constitution is void. As the Constitution now exists, the President has to follow the British precedent in many matters. Unfortunately, there is no British precedent in this matter.”

R. Venkataraman (1910–2009) seventh Vice-President of India and the 8th President of India

The Rediff Interview/R Venkataraman

“A course of precedents and judicial proceedings in Courts of justice make the law: it would be endless to cite cases upon it. A course of practice for a few years has been held to controul an Act of Parliament.”

John Eardley Wilmot (1709–1792) English judge

Wilkes' Case (1770), 19 How. St. Tr. 1130.

“The Founders would be uniformly horrified to think that their treasured Constitution has been used to justify abortion. It is a great irony that leftwing justices, arguing that the Constitution is a “living document,” have turned it into a writ to kill.”

Steven W. Mosher (1948) American social scientist

The Abortion Movement Just Lost their War on the Unborn https://www.pop.org/content/abortion-movement-just-lost-their-war-unborn (November 9, 2016)

“No man could have written from memory Mr. Otis’s argument of four or five hours, against the acts of trade, as revenue laws, and against writs of assistance, as a tyrannical engine to execute them, the next day after it was spoken. How awkward, then, would be an attempt to do it after a lapse of fifty-seven years! Nevertheless, some of the heads of his discourse are so indelibly imprinted on my mind, that I will endeavor to give you some very short hints of them.”

John Adams (1735–1826) 2nd President of the United States

1810s, Letter to William Tudor (1818)

“Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.”

John Marshall (1755–1835) fourth Chief Justice of the United States

5. U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 177
Marbury v. Madison (1803)

“If you mean by "military victory" an Iraqi government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible.”

Henry Kissinger (1923–2023) United States Secretary of State

Commenting on the Iraq War in a BBC interview of 19 November 2006, as quoted in "Kissinger: Iraq military win impossible" by Tariq Panja, Associated Press, at Yahoo! News (20 November 2006) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061120/ap_on_re_mi_ea/britain_iraq_kissinger <br class="br">2000s

“We are not to issue process here as instruments or conduit-pipes, but judicially as Judges: and it will not be an objection to say, that we may award process at all hazards, and let the party grieved come after and plead to it; for we shall never grant an ill-writ, that the party may avoid it in pleading.”

John Holt (Lord Chief Justice) (1642–1710) English lawyer and Lord Chief Justice of England

Lucy v. Bishop of St. David's (1702), 7 Mod. 59.

“Whether a law be void for its repugnancy to the Constitution, is, at all times, a question of much delicacy, which out seldom, if ever, to be decided in the affirmative, in doubtful case. … But it is not on slight implication and vague conjecture that the legislature is to be pronounced to have transcended its powers, and its acts to be considered as void. The opposition between the Constitution and the law should be such that the judge feels a clear and strong conviction of their incompatibility with each other.”

John Marshall (1755–1835) fourth Chief Justice of the United States

Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 87, 128 (1810)

“Every discrimination against women in the constitutions and laws of the several States is today null and void, precisely as in every one against Negroes.”

Susan B. Anthony (1820–1906) American women's rights activist

Woman's Rights to the Suffrage Speech (1873)

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

James Otis Jr.13

Related quotes

Related topics