Congress Trying To Reverse Supreme Court Decisions

[Don_G]

According to HR 3920, a RETHUG has submitted a Bill that would allow Supreme Court decisions to be overturned by political means: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.3920:/

[RoyGBiv]

1. Let's hope...

Let's hope it dies in committee.

I've had people try to tell me that Marbury v. Madison can't be overturned. This seems to be a direct assault on it. It would set up an interesting Constitutional battle: If it is passed and then ruled unconstitutional by SOCTUS and then overturned by Congress and then ... <infinite loop error>.

I recently read a book called What Kind of Nation by James F. Simon concerned with the ongoing battles between John Marshall, Thomas Jefferson, and their allies. I think it would be instructive reading for those interested in this kind of topic. The origins of so-called judicial activism are two centuries old and, according to Simon, helped define us as a nation.

The neoconservatives are attempting a redefinition that takes us back to the 18th century.

[fujiyama]

4. I'm no constitutional scholar

but this seems like nonsense, and unless the Supreme Court wants to overturn one of the most important and fundamental cases, this really has no chance of passing any constitutionality.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. Sounds like a breach of the separation of powers.

I sometimes wonder how politicians can make it into congress without obtaining a full understanding of our constitution.

[rogerashton]

3. They can already be.

It's called a "consitutional amendment."

Actually, simple legislation can do it in some cases, because not all SC rulings are constitutional rulings. But, in the case of constitutional rulings, a constitutional amendment clearly can reverse a constitutional ruling, and logically it is the only thing that can.

Example: in the 19th century, the SC ruled that income taxes were unconstitutional. Early 20th, a constitutional amendment made them legal.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. Nice try, Congress. No dice. Your proposed bill is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court, under the Constitution and Marbury v. Madison, dictates the last word on any law -- unless you want to go through all the time, money, and effort to amend the Constitution itself. Then, if so, go knock yourselves out. Add 100 new amendments to the Constitution. See if you don't end up contradicting already-established laws in place and watch the fun as "folks" run to the courthouse in order to get an interpretation of the law before they do anything otherwise relatively simple and logical.

This bill is nothing more than a movie set front to show your constituents that you have actually "done something" on the Hill, in order to raise more money to buoy your incumbency dreams, and to keep the system running in place as it exists. You know this is a useless waste of time. Thanks for using my hard-earned tax dollars so wisely -- again. You rock.