[CA Conservative]

Second, an activist judge would simply say that congress cannot legislate the jurisdiction of the supreme court to decide the constitutionality of the legislation because that would violate separation of powers.

Actually, you are wrong here. This has been used before, and the Supreme Court agreed that they had no ability to review a law that Congress (and the President) specifically shielded from such review.

Our Constitutional expert-in-residence, the honorable Congressman BillyBob, can probably give you the relevant case(s).

[Congressman Billybob]

There have been many cares recognizing the power of Congress by law to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts. The most recent one I'm aware of is the Aleska case. That was the company formed to build the Alaska Pipeline.

Some tree-hugging lawyers in Seattle (IIRC) got an injunction against the further construction of the pipeline under an obscure statute. Congress then withdrew jurisdiction from the courts. Then the court which had issued the injunction withdrew it, ruling that it was without power to act any further in the matter.

A full discussion of this subject would include a description of the "fundamental law" exception to this general provision in the language of Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution. However, the power to do this is long established and repeatedly recognized.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "South Pacific" Lesson about Muslims