Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SAJ
I'm no constitutional scholar, so is this what you're referring to?

In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellateJurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

It would certainly make sense to make legislatures have the final say since they are made up of elected people instead of appointed (altho if memory serves some bodies weren't elected by the people at the founding) but unlike a president (or governor) where people could make a mistake and put 1 idiot and/or a melovolent in charge (like Obama who is IMO both) with a legislature there are numbers so at least some of them should be competent/decent.

As far as Ideas. term limits has lost it's momentum, but I can say I cannot stand seeing politicians making 40 and 50 year careers out of what should be a temporary job. granted that might get rid of some of the very few good ones. But IMO so be it, nothing is perfect.

I believe Bork had the idea that congress could overturn a supreme court ruling with congressional supermajorities. Seems like a good one, esp if the supermajority is not insurmountably large.

Lastly, one of my own-- one lowly judge, should not be a able to say, for example, gay marriage is unconstitutional and then its just wiped out even if a pres and congress said otherwise. It should at least have to go all the way through the appeals process to the supreme court before any change occurs.

Unfortunately with people being imperfect there will never be a perfect system. A democracy can only be as good as its people and our people are failing (granted a lot of that has to do with the media that is unerinforming/misinforming them, but still they are failing)

28 posted on 08/02/2014 10:41:44 AM PDT by Cubs Fan (Illegal immigration will be America's downfall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: Cubs Fan

The Federalist Papers make clear that the Legislative branch has primacy, with the Judicial branch intended to be the weakest of the three.


29 posted on 08/02/2014 10:44:51 AM PDT by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Cubs Fan
Exactly. The clause you cite is the clause granting the Regress the power to overturn judicial fiat decisions with an appropriate statute. Alternately, this clause also appears to grant the Regress the power to BAR courts from ruling on a certain law or in a certain area of law (which, naturally, opens a whole new bag of snakes.)

Note that most such controversies could be resolved without resort to Art. III Sec. 2 by men of generally good will who have respect for the Constitution. Doesn't even require a supermajority in either house of the Regress, just requires a statute. Given that Reid, McConnell, Weepy John and Bela Pelosi now "lead" the Regress, I estimate the chances of my condition above occurrin are, as the mathematicians say, "within epsilon of zero".

30 posted on 08/02/2014 12:19:57 PM PDT by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson