AND...if Congress shall make no law.........the same prohibition applies to courts of law which make decisions carrying the weight of law...or even carrying the weight of being in-effect illegal Constitutional amendments. Both Roe v Wade (which de-regulated abortion doctors who are licensed by the states & aren’t above the law) & the recent decisions on same-sex marriage & even on Obamacare...were cases where judges/courts were allowed to illegally amend the United States Constitution ..which only can be amended by supermajority of the people. If judges are given the power to decide how much power judges are given by the Constitution, then there are no checks or balances on high courts & judges...who soon decide that nobody can stop them from illegally amending the Constitution to force states to license same-sex marriage.....or to declare all takings may be called “taxes”, then declare that all taxes are unconstitutional...ignoring all the rights of the people & restrictions against taxes & takings already in the U.S> Constitution.....Obamacare.
The federal court should make no law regarding ANY subject period. They are merely empowered to decide guilt or innocence on existing law.
The power of nullification is one they share with the States and the other 2 branches of the Federal government it does NOT include the power to demand action on the part of any other party merely to refuse cooperative action.
That is the key to nullification and why it enforces a Constituent of law (limits) to the Government not entitlements from the government which are in practice unreliable and depended upon the consent and good policy of politicians.
You cannot in a constitutional system empower any one party to demand action by any other party. That would in effect negate the protection of checks and balances. That is why nullification is one way non-cooperation only.